


sc Sree heer sia sthees 
aT aterelereieyars) attiee* 
*is]eleyeseseit 








ob tetey 


feet 









$yecete test: 


opebeieTeieitaca 











Sielategers fe 

Sib tta Te Ste 
*Telede) 

Teretard 








Crevesee 


i 






She hepegesss 








ape ererstiisesis: 
ebrataret es beste) det sy 


ists 


he 












ait iethie 


aj isiece 





bg 4s 
Loree 
rie ot. 








sittrabanapeiereset 4 
Terk le diets 






Ligiarertr4l4/eiereng 





eitiele 
hide bitin 





+e tieletateraiate 
SATU he ite tie ret 








Tuas is 





net 


ooh 








ecteteee ete IR 
pat trerer eT oi, 









lee 2 


i te 














G. “mor Coblaga, IGbee 








BRYN MAWR NOTES 
AND MONOGRAPHS 
VI 


THE GREEKS IN SPAIN 


” 








uoredoysolowa 





THE GREEKS IN SPAIN 


By 
RHYS CARPENTER 


Professor of Classical Archeology 
in Bryn Mawr College 





BRYN MAWR COLLEGE 
Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania 


LONGMANS, GREEN AND CoO, 
London, New York, Bombay, Calcutta and Madras 


1925 


GREEKS IN SPAIN 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER PAGE 
Eo Carel ele Sie a 1 
ne ee a 6 


III. INFERENCE 
i. The Voyage to Tartessos.... 12 
ii. The Santa Elena Bronzes.... 37 
iii, The Massiliot Sailing-book... 47 


iv. Greek Art and Iberian....... if) 

GAT GE a PACS) i a 97 
MRR S yt ere eas te 8 tes 117 
NR a Bug a wo oie 9 0 0. 141 
MNRAS ho se ey o'slbe wes 163 
LIST OP ELLUSTRATIONS...........-: 169 
0 SESE ee a 175 
GHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. ............ 179 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


VI 





vi THE GREEKS 





OUTE Yap ypvads, OK apyupos, 
sQOA \ 4 XsQA , 
ovoe 67) yahkos, ovoe otdnpos 
ovdapod THS yNS ovTE TOTOUTOS 
»/?> 9 9 \ 17 
ov? ovtws ayalds e€yracrat 
VEVVOMEVOS MEX PL VUV. 
: —Stra bos biiaai8: 





VI BRYN MAWR NOTES 


EN SoweA TN 


The Samians found Tartessos axnparos, 
a market untouched. I cannot assert the same. 
Schulten and Bosch have been before me in 
many regions, and my obligation to both 
these scholars is as deep as it is obvious. To 
Dr. Bosch I have also more personal acknowl- 
edgments to make, for friendship’s sake and 
for material assistance in photographs and 
publications. I have also to thank Dr. Mélida 
of the Museo Arqueolégico of Madrid for per- 
mission to photograph the three Santa Elena 
bronzes and to make a drawing of the frag- 
ment of Iberian moulding. 

The connected account, the fitting of arch-| 
aeological evidence with historical inference, 
the discovery of the Ionic statuettes among the 
Santa Elena bronzes, of the lost site of the 
Greek town of Hemeroskopeion, the stylistic 
parallels for Iberian pottery and Iberian 
sculpture, the stylistic arguments for the 
original Greek authorship of the Lady of 
Elche and the Asklepios of Ampurias— 
these I may fairly claim for my own contri- 
bution to the subject. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 



























THE GREEKS 


I have tried to make readable a piece of 
documented archaeological investigation. For 
this reason there is some discrepancy of style 
between text and commentary, since for the 
latter I have assumed the professional eye of 
my archaeological colleagues and for the 
former the attention of the more general 
reader of ancient history, who may (I hope) 
find the body of the book worth his time for the 
picture which it presents of Phocaean activi- 
ties in the West. May neither public take 
too seriously my opening chapter on “ Leg- 
end,’ or embroil me in views on Homeric 
geography of which I am guiltless! 

Like Posidonios, I hold to the Wevopa 
gouixixov. Being by training an Hellenic 
archaeologist, I can do no less. If this is a 
prejudice rather than a right principle, I 
hope that I may be forgiven, since, after all, 
I have been writing, not upon Phoenicians 
and Carthaginians, but upon Greeks in 


Spain. 


Bryn Mawr College 
January, 1925 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





VI 





IN SPAIN 


I 


LEGEND 
FAR out to the West lay the fabulous land. 


Already in the Homeric Odyssey it is 
apparent that the Greeks have heard of it, 
perhaps have begun to voyage to its rich 
mysterious shores. There is the country 
of the Laestrygons where the nights are 
short (as they were for the Tartessian ships 


that sailed to Brittany in search of tin) and 
the lands of fog where one goes down into 
the underworld (like the foggy mouth of 
the River Guadiana and the weird chthonic 
shrines of the Rio Tinto marshes beyond 
Tartessos). Tin and the amber of the 
Phoenicians are commonplaces of the} 
Homeric world; and the stream of Ocean 
and the western trade-wind are familiar. 
A little later, Hesiod is full of Hesperian 
echoes. Although (alas) it appears his- 
torically impossible that the orange trees 
of Spain, with their gorgeous fruit, bore 
those golden apples for which Herakles 





AND MONOGRAPHS 


THE GREEKS 


journeyed westward, yet Morocco or Spain 
must surely be that land where Atlas held 
the sky. Herakles himself is partly an 
Hesperian hero: he journeys in the bowl of 
the sun to the utmost West, and the straits 
from the Mediterranean out to the world- 
ocean are named for him. He slays 
Geryon and drives away the sacred kine 
from the Sun’s western kingdom, as sea- 
men may already have tried to do in that 
Tartessian land where there were cattle 
dedicate to the god of the sky. The legend 
of Perseus becomes localised here in the 
West: the Gorgons live here (whoever they 
may be), and Andromeda’s sea-monster is 
perhaps an echo from Atlantic voyages.! 
Legends, like civilisation, marched west- 
ward in olden time. In the ninth and 
eighth centuries B.C. it was the Black Sea 
which used to be the place of high adven- 
ture for Milesian ships, and the Dardan- 
elles and the Bosporus were the dangerous 
gates upon the unknown. But whereas 
Jason sails east to the Caucasus, the heroes 
of the next generation sail westward. The 
Odyssey has ceased to heed the dangers of 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





PN vo PA TN 


the Dardanelles passage and now tells its 
mariners’ legends about the terrible Sic- 
ilian straits, makes an enchanted nymph’s 
abode of some Mediterranean island of the 
West, tells of the idyllic life of the African 
oases with their datepalms (which it calls 
the country of the Lotos-eaters) and has 
heard vaguely of the land where the sungod 
keeps his cattle, and the shores of the foggy 
sea, and even (at uttermost distance) the 
northern lands of the short summer-nights. 

And still as time went on and the nearer 
lands and seas became familiar and lost 
their terrors, the legends moved westward 
on the margin of the known. The Land of 
the Blest may once have been in Sicily; 
later for a time the Balearics may have 
been the Fortunate Isles before these came 
ashore still further west in Andalusia and 
at last were pushed out to the Canaries or 
the Cabo Verde Islands on the very verge 
of the utterly Unnavigable. The legend of 
Geryon was once localised in Epirus; but 
Greek mariners carried it west to Anda- 
lusia, just as they moved the mouth of the 
underworld away from the Bay of Naples 


AND MONOGRAPHS 








THE GREEKS 


and the Cumaean shore to the Gulf of 
Cadiz. Much later, this was to pass to 
Land’s End between Vigo and Corufia, 
where it was to live on into the Middle 
Ages as the place of souls that sat like 
winged birds in the misty tree of death.? 
And further west than that there was no 
land to travel. 

In Pindar’s time the voyage to Spain had 
already become thoroughly familiar: the 
fearful margin of the world had moved out 
to the high Atlantic. The mariners’ re- 
ports of the sea beyond Gibraltar mightily 
impressed the poet, as did the Cartha- 
ginians’ success in closing the straits to 
Greek vessels. Again and again®® in the 
Odes Pindar recurs to the Pillars of Her- 
akles as a symbol of the bourne beyond 
which men may not venture. This is good 
testimony that the Greeks of his day were 
sailing only as.far as Malaga or Calpe and 
leaving the Atlantic coasting-trade in other 
hands. 

By the time of Plato the margin of the 
marvellous had faded beyond Spain. At- 
lantis is now the fabulous land, ill localised 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





EN SPA LIN 


and wisely lost forever. Already, long 
before Pindar or Plato, Spain had loomed 
clear out of the mist of legend. Famili- 
arity had dispelled the mariners’ yarns 
from the first heroic voyages, and historical 
record had put aside the barter and traffic 
in seaman’s talk which had been passing 
from man to man as readily as once had 
passed Phoenician amber and tin through 
all the Middle Sea. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





THE GREEKS 


II 
RECORD 


‘“‘A SAMIAN vessel, under the command of 


Hadt. iv. 152}8 man named Colaeus, on its way to Egypt 
(tr. Rawlin-| was forced to put in at Platea.... They 


son) 


VI 


quitted the island; and, anxious to reach 
Egypt, made sail in that direction, but 
were carried out of their course by a gale 
of wind from the east. ‘The storm not 
abating, they were driven past the pillars 
of Hercules, and at last, by some special 
guiding providence, reached ‘Tartessus. 
This trading town was in those days a vir- 
gin port, unfrequented by the merchants. 
The Samians, in consequence, made by the 
return-voyage a, profit greater than any 
Greeks before their day.” 

Whatever we may choose to think of a 
storm that blows a Greek sailing-boat 
through 30 degrees of longitude, carrying 
it through the Carthaginian Strait and the 
Strait of Gibraltar without wrecking it on 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





IN; SPAIN 


the Tunisian or the Spanish coast, there is 
no reason to doubt the underlying tradi- 
tion that a Samian vessel reached Tar- 
tessos at some very early time. The Her- 
odotean version would set the event in the 
middle of the seventh century, and actu- 
ally there is no apparent reason why the 
first Samian voyage should not have ante- 
dated the year 630 B.c. 

There is no historical statement that this 
exploit of Kolaios was repeated immedi- 
ately; but the rumour of Tartessos must 
have been rife among Greek mariners and 
the way to it now known and open to all. 
Another Ionic town, Phocaea, took over the 
opportunity of exploiting the new market 
in the West. A late Latin picture of her 
mariners is flattering at least to their 
energy and hardihood—piscando, mercando, 
plerumque etiam latrocinio maris . . . vilam 
tolerabant. Great on the sea from the last 
of the seventh century until the destruc- 
tion of their town by Harpagus the Mede 
about 540 B.c., they were described by 
Herodotus as ‘‘the first of the Greeks who 
performed long voyages.” 





AND MONOGRAPHS 





THE GREEKS 


‘And it was they,” he goes on to say, 
g 


Hdt. i. 163 |““who made the Greeks acquainted with] 


(Rawlin- 
son) 


VI 


the Adriatic and with Tyrrhenia, with 
Iberia, and the city of Tartessus. The 
vessel which they used in their voyages 
was not the round-built merchant-ship, 
but the long penteconter. On their arrival 
at Tartessus, the king of the country, whose 
name was Arganthonius, took a liking to 
them. This monarch reigned over the 
Tartessians for eighty years and lived to 
be a hundred and twenty years old. He 
regarded the Phocaeans with so much 
favour as, at first, to beg them to quit Ionia 
and settle in whatever part of his country 
they liked. Afterwards, finding that he 
could not prevail upon them to agree to 
this, and hearing that the Mede was grow- 
ing great in their neighbourhood, he gave 
them money to build a wall about their 
town, and certainly he must have given it 
with a bountiful hand.” 

We may guess that Arganthonios’ invi- 
tation to live in Spain was not wholly unso- 
licited, ‘but that the Phocaeans, being 
already aware of the Medic danger, had 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


IN SPAIN 


begun to debate the advisability of emigra- 
tion. We do not know why they decided 
against it; but it is not surprising that 
they were unwilling to cut themselves off 
so utterly from their fellow Greeks by set- 
tling the Sevillian plain. 

The episode must date from the middle 
years of the sixth century. By 540 B.c. 
(according to Herodotus) Arganthonios 
was dead, and the dreaded Cyrus had re- 
fused Ionian offers of submission. There- 
after Phocaea fell. A part of her inhabi- 
tants passed under the Persian yoke, the 
rest emigrated to Corsica to their colony of 
Alalia whence, after five years, the Etrus- 
cans drove them out. Thereupon they 
retired to the Greek lands of southern Italy, 
founded Velia, and there survived and 
prospered. But the road to Spain, for a 
time at least, seems to have been closed to 
their ships by their enemies, Etruria and 
Carthage. 

The period of Phocaean trade in Spain 
lasted therefore less than a century—per- 
haps for precisely those eighty years during 
which the Phocaeans knew the silver-man 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


VI 


10 


VI 





THE GREEKS 


Arganthonios (together with a like-named 
son and successor?) and so gave Herodotus 
his tradition of an eighty-year reign. Only 
a hundred years separate the traditional 
date of that first adventurous storm-bound 
voyage of the Samian Kolaios from the date 
of the battle of Alalia when Etruscans and 
Carthaginians, though worsted by the Pho- 
caean ships, succeeded in putting an end 
to Phocaean power in Corsica and the West. 
Perhaps, then, we shall be justified in put- 
ting the first period of Spanish trade at a 
round 80 years, from 620 to 540 B.c. But 
for all this period and those that followed 
thereon, when Massilia took over the Pho- 
caean trade and had her tiny towns on the 
Spanish coast, there are no surviving rec- 
ords. There is no historian to tell us what 
these Greeks did in Spain. This whole 
page of exploration, commerce, and adven- 
ture, of contact between Greek and bar- 
barian, always so fruitful and so interesting 
—this whole page of Greek colonial history 
is blank. 

But a blank page was ever an incentive 
to authorship, and here there are archaeo- 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


[NS PAIN 


logical means available to fill the missing 
chronicle. No one has yet succeeded in 
appreciating the tremendous influence of 
the Phocaeans (“‘who made the Greeks 
acquainted with Tyrrhenia’’) in shaping 
Etruscan art; but in Spain, which to a 
lesser degree these same Ionians opened 
up to Greek influences, their opportunities 
and their success were vastly less. For 
that reason a study of this latter field of 
the Greeks in Spain is a much less ambi- 
tious undertaking, a work for an idle year 
rather than for a scholar’s lifetime. And 
this study I have ventured to attempt. 
What follows, then, is all only inference, 
vitiated here and there no doubt by wrong 
conclusions, but not without a basis of 
evidence and a foundation in fact. 





AND MONOGRAPHS 





THE GREEKS 


III 
INFERENCE 


I. THE VOYAGE TO TARTESSOS 


WE may imagine the old Phocaean long- 
ships with their fifty-odd men for crew set- 
ting out from their city in the Bay of 
Smyrna from the land ‘‘where the air and 
climate are the most beautiful in the whole 
world; for no other region is equally blessed 
with Ionia, neither above it nor below it, 
nor east nor west of it.’”’ Across the Aegean 


_|with its island stepping-stones and around 


Map inside 
front cover 


the southern capes of Greece the Phocaeans 
must have sailed by the western shores of 
Peloponnesus and Epirus northward until, 
above Corcyra, they crossed to the heel of 
Italy and so, in their second week of sea- 
faring, passed through the Sicilian straits 
and still coasting a Grecian shore came to 
the Bay of Naples and to Cumae, the oldest 
Greek city in the West, and to Ischia, 
which they called ‘‘ Monkey-Island,” Pithe- 
Russa. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





PN oe SoPATLN 


These ancient place-names with an -ussa 
ending? are perhaps of some importance 
as an indication of the presence of the 
early Greek voyagers. At the least, it is 
very striking that they form a perfect track 
from Italy to Spain. Given the old-time 
preference for hugging the shore and avoid- 
ing the shelterless unharvestable open sea, 
one would naturally think of this voyage 
to Spain as a coasting-trip, leading up the 
western shore of Italy, along the Riviera, 
and down the southeast coast of France; 
but if we follow the track of the -ussa names 
we shall find a different route leading over 
| the great island-bridge of the western Medi- 
terranean. For after the ‘‘Monkey-Is- 
land” of Ischia, Pithekussa, comes Sardinia 
“‘“which the Greeks who sailed thither for 
trading called Ichnussa.’’ The course from 
Ischia would have skirted the little group 
of the Ponza Islands and then struck 
across 160 miles of open water to the north- 
east coast of Sardinia. Here the land comes 
up, grey and inhospitable and apparently 
harbourless: more than seven hundred 
years after these Phocaean voyages Pau- 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


Paus. 
>. dol ee | 


VI 


14 


Paus. 
x. 17. 10 
(tr. Frazer) 


Gesch. d. 
Alt. 
II. p. 694. n. 


VI 


THE GREE@EeS 


sanias was to write of it how ‘‘the northern 
side of the island and the side towards the 
Italian mainland are occupied by an un- 
broken chain of rugged mountains; and, 
as you coast along, there is no anchorage 
for ships in this part of the island, and from 
the tops of the mountains fitful and furious 
squalls come sweeping down to the sea.” 
But the description is not quite accurate, 
since there are a couple of deep bays where 
ships may find shelter, and in one of these 
(the modern Terranova) lay the little set- 
tlement of Olbia, whose name seems suf- 
ficient warrant for calling it Greek and 
probably Phocaean. ‘Wenn Olbia auf 
Sardinien jemals griechisch gewesen ist, 
wird es von den Phokaeern gegrtindet sein,” 
says Eduard Meyer. 

Ionians and Carthaginians alike had put 
a covetous eye upon this, “‘the largest island 
in the world,” as they erroneously judged 
it; but it is a mistake to imagine that in 
the seventh and sixth centuries B.c. either 
of these peoples held it. No Punic objects 
of earlier date than the sixth century have 
been found on the island, and our first his- 


BRYN MAWR NODES 


PN SPAIN 


torical evidence for Carthaginian aggres- 
sion is Malchus’ unsuccessful raid about 
540 B.c. About that very time the wise 
Bias of Priene was advising the harassed 


15 


Ionians “to join in one body, set sail for]pat. i. 170 


Sardinia, and there found a single Pan- 
Ionic city; so they would escape from 
slavery and rise to great fortune, being 
masters of the largest island in the world 
and exercising dominion even beyond its 
bounds; whereas if they stayed in Ionia, he 
saw no prospect of their ever recovering 
their lost freedom.” Though his advice 
was not followed, the mere fact that it 
could be given at this time indicates that 
Sardinia was not then closed to Greek en- 
terprise; and in earlier days the conditions 
would have been the same. Even as late 
as 494 B.c. Aristagoras of Miletus could 
still advise Ionian Greeks to settle in Sar- 
dinia. 

Here, then, at Olbia on the north-eastern 
shore, the Phocaeans probably had a resting 
place and a refuge before they passed 
through the windy strait between Sardinia 
and Corsica where ‘‘the sea is studded with 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


(Rawlin- 
son) 


Hdt. v. 124 


VI 


16 


Frazer 
Comm. 
Paus. 

ad. x.17.10 


Paus. 
Xo l/s 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


ugly and jagged rocks over which the waves 
break in foam,” and from the island of 
Asinara and the Capo del Falcone at the 
extreme north-west of Sardinia set sail for 
two full days and nights of open sea, steer- 
ing a little south of west till Menorca came 
up over the sea-line. 

Shore to shore here is a good 200 miles 
and one may hesitate to believe that the 
Phocaean ships, fast and long as they were, 
ever ventured to come this way. Yet there 
are many arguments in favor of this route 
over the “‘island-bridge.”’ 

In the first place, there is some evidence 
that the crossing from Spain to Sardinia 
was known from the earliest times. Paus- 
anias has a tradition of an “‘Iberian”’ coloni- 
sation of Sardinia, for he says categorically 
that ‘“‘the Iberians crossed into Sardinia, 
under the command of Norax, and founded 
a city Nora, which tradition affirms to have 
been the earliest city in the island.’ A\l- 
though nothing very much can be based 
on such information, it is at least supported | 
by the archaeological observation that 
Sardinia and the Balearic Islands had a 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


IN SPAIN 


flourishing civilisation in the Bronze Age 
which contrasts strikingly with their pov- 
erty in the succeeding Iron Age, so that it 
is not improbable that the island-route to 
Spain was in operation in Minoan times 
and conferred prosperity upon these island 
way-stations. 

Then, it should be noted that the old 
name for the western Mediterranean from 
Sardinia to Spain, north of about 38° lati- 
tude, was the ‘‘Sardinian Sea.’ This 
indicates not only the early importance of 
Sardinia but a clear knowledge of its posi- 
tion with reference to the lands to the west 
of it. 

Next, as indication that the bridge was 
travelled by the Greeks, we have the track 
of -ussa names; for not only was Sardinia 
Ichnussa, but it is possible that Menorca 
and Mallorca were called Melussa and 
Kromyussa,' and it is certain that the lesser 
Balearic islands were the Pityussae and 
Formentera was called Ophiussa. It is 
true that there is no evidence for Greek 
colonisation or settlement on these islands 
or commercial interest in them; but in that 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





Diodor. 
v. 16 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


case it is hard to see why the Greeks were 
as familiar with them as they seem to have 
been, unless they passed them en route to 
Spain. It cannot, I think, be objected that 
these islands were held by the Phoenicians 
or Carthaginians, since there is no reason 
for dating the Punic expansion back of the 
later sixth century, except the very dubious 
testimony of Timaeus that Ibiza (Ebusus 
of the Pityussae) was colonised 160 years 
after the founding of Carthage. The 
archaeological evidence’ is ample for the 
period from the later sixth century on: for 
any earlier date it is, here as in Sardinia, so 
uncertain that I am led to look on the early 
Punic colonisation of these islands as a 
myth. The first great period of Carthaginian 
sea-power and colonial expansion comes 
in the sixty years between the sea-fights of 
Alalia and Cumae, or roughly 535-475 B.c. 

And lastly, the journey by the island- 
bridge was not merely many days shorter 
than the coasting-trip around the top of 
the Mediterranean, but it took off from the 
Greek waters of Campania and avoided 
the Etruscan ships and the too-often hos- 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


IN SPAIN 


tile Etruscan shore. In fact, if the theory 
of the lateness of the Carthaginian expan- 
sion is correct, the island-bridge afforded 
the Phocaeans a safe passage between the 
hostile ward of Carthage and Etruria. 

From Menorca it is not forty miles to 
Mallorca whose mountain-tops are from 
the first in plain sight; and from the islet 
of Cabrera off Mallorca’s southern cape 
one can see, misty-clear against the west, 
Ibiza, last of the Balearic Islands. So by 
Melussa and Kromyussa and Pityussa the 
old Phocaeans steered their pentekonters 
and there, from beside the last of these, 
caught sight at length of the mountain- 
shore of Spain. 

As they neared, they beheld a coast-line 
of hundred-foot cliffs behind which a stretch 
of green undulating land ran back to higher 
hills. The headland is called to-day the 
Cape of the Ship, Cabo de la Nao, and offers 
no landing-place or harbour.’? But south 
along the coast after eight or nine miles 
there is a sort of fishers’ haven (now called 
Moraira) and then, a few miles further, 
comes a deep bay with a shingle beach and 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





20 


See 
Frontis- 
piece 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


a stream of fresh water. At the end of the 
beach against the open sea, as though ex- 
pressly reared for shelter, stands a gigantic 
isolated tower-like mountain of rock, a 
look-out post guarding the island-bridge. 
It is a wonderful watching-place over the 
sea. From the top of it I have seen north- 
eastward the peaks of Balearic Ibiza 
seventy miles away and south-westward 
the bays and shores and islets of the Span- 
ish coast for almost as many miles in the 
other direction, beyond Cabo Santa Pola 
and the Isola Plana. Only the Spanish 
coast northward is completely hidden from 
sight by the hills and mountains of the 
Cabo de la Nao. What wonder that this 
marvellous lookout-post, like a second 
Gibraltar, a true pillar of Herakles, im- 
pressed the Phocaeans who drew up their 
ships behind its shelter; and what wonder 
that they gave it a picturesque name and 
called it the Watchtower, the Day-Warder, 
‘Hyepockoretov? So, at least, one prefers 
to translate the word; but even if a prose- 
usage®’ suggests that the true force is better 
conveyed merely by “‘Lookout-post,” it is 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 








The ‘‘Watchtower’’ and South Bay 


II 


uoredoysorouo fy Jo (2) samen? 





PNeePAIN 







obvious that this great sheer thousand-foot|1076 feet 
tower explains the otherwise inexplicable|(U- 5: Navy 
i : Hydro- 

name of the first Greek town in Spain. graphic) 
My Frontispiece reproduces the great 
isolated mass of the ‘‘ Watchtower”? with 
the open sea beyond. In the middle dis- 
tance, the deep harbor sweeps in behind 
the shelter of the tower and is fringed on 
the left by a low reef of rock backed by 
river-sand. Plate I gives a nearer view of 
the sheltered bay and the tower with its 
cliffs, while Plate II shows the character of 
the reef very clearly, with indications in 
the middle foreground of quarry-marks 
which may very well be ancient. Plate III 
reproduces a photograph which I took from 
the top of the ‘‘Tower,’’ whose shadow 
shows as a dark half-moon on the lower rim. 
To the left of the shadow stretches the low 
|reef which marks the shore-line with its 
shingle of sand and pebbles. Q marks the 
quarries of Plate II. At P a passage once 
led through the reef into a landlocked 
basin or inner harbor H. Passage and basin 
are to-day entirely silted up, except for a 
stretch of salt standing-water S which 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





See Fig. 2 
on p. 121 


VI 


THE GREEKS 





appears (rather like a stadium in shape) 
just above the peak’s shadow; but one may 
guess their original shape and extent from 
the flat depression around H. At X ona 
slightly elevated tongue of rock there are 
indications to suggest the emplacement of 
a shrine or temple. On the slopes which 
lead up to the great Watchtower (on the 
left in the frontispiece; on the central sky- 
line in Plate II) there are traces of Cyclo- 
pean walls and great quantities of broken 
potsherds lying from 2 to 6 feet below the 
surface of the soil and belonging to Hellen- 
istic, Iberian, and late red-figure Attic 
ware (second to fifth centuries B.c.). 

Until the site has been excavated, this is 
all that can be said of Hemeroskopeion. 

No doubt, it was at first a mere shelter- 
station, a place for the Phocaean ships to 
put in, before or after the 800-mile journey 
across the island-bridge to Cumae. ‘That 
it ever had much importance as a trading- 
place and market is unlikely, as it lay in 
the territory of backward tribes, whence 
neither road nor river led to the mining 
regions. But as a shipping station, holding 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


& 
x 
= 
sr 

7 





smigl 


yor] JO yuruInS ayy Wor; ‘uotadoysoIowaTPyT Jo dz OUT 








IN SPAIN 


the bridge-head to South Italy, it must have 
steadily gained in importance as long as the 
bridge was used and the Phocaean ships 
traded with Tartessos. 

The Watchtower to-day is called Punta 
de Ifach and the little Spanish town whose 
church and rooftops show in the frontis- 
piece bears the remarkable name Calpe— 
remarkable, because Calpe was also the 
old indigenous name for Gibraltar and its 
recurrence here seems to bear testimony 
that the close resemblance between Ifach 
and Gibraltar had struck the ancient mind. 
It is disappointing that there is nothing to 
tell us what Calpe (or the native word back 
of the Hellenised form Calpe) may have 
signified. 

My identification of the ancient Hem- 
eroskopeion with Ifach has no authority. 
It is known that the old Phocaean town is 
to be sought in the neighbourhood of the 
Cabo de la Nao, but the very old mistake 
of identifying it with Dianium has until 
now prevented the true site from being 
found. As the question is complicated, 
yet important enough to justify discussion, 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


23 


VI 


24 


Appendix 
I 





VI 


THE GREEKS 


I have treated it fully in an appendix and 
there have set out my reasons for holding 
that in Ifach I have discovered Hemero- 
skopeion. 

Here, in the new land of the West, the 
Phocaeans must have felt a certain sense 
of home. ‘Though they had left “the most 
beautiful air and climate in the world,” 
they had come to a region almost equally 
limpid and delightful. Beyond Ifach the 
mountains rise like Ionian hills, grey but 
flecked and tinged with red, bathed in a 
truly Grecian clarity of light, above blue 
seas and against blue skies. Valencia is 
perhaps the most favored region climatic- 
ally in Spain, with much the same tempera- 
ture and seasons as Phocaea and the Bay 
of Smyrna. Unlike the bleak and inclement 
elevated interior of the Spanish peninsula 
or the richer and rainier lowlands of Anda- 
lusia, the soil and the climate here on the 
east coast are redolent of Greece. The 
treeless limestone slopes are covered with 
aromatic herbs that fill the air with their 
perfume of mint and thyme crushed under- 
foot. The clear skies are often rainless for 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





IN SPAIN 


weeks af a time, and for days on end the 
steady winds tumble the blue seas into 
foam. 

As one sails south from Ifach along the 
Spanish coast, the mountains recede inland; 
behind the fringe of sandy beaches spread 
plains, more and more fertile and stretching 
wider and wider away to the hills. This is 
to-day the province of Murcia. In the old 
day the kingdom of Tartessos extended 
eastward as far as this, though the inhabi- 
tants were Massians (or Mastians), allied 
and related to the Tartessians rather than 
true Tartessians themselves. Here, clearly, 
there were prosperous villages, ready to 
welcome Greek trade, Greek wine and 
Greek olives, a people not wholly insuscep- 
tible to Greek intelligence and Greek artis- 
try, as I shall try to show later.5® Then, as 
now, it must have been a rich land with a 
climate sunny and agreeable in winter and 
desperately hot in fullsummer. A modern 
description of the region (culled from a 
book whose wisdom is not to be despised 
by scholars) may deserve quotation here 
in full: 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


29 


VI 


26 


Baedeker’s 
Spain 
pp. 281-82 


VI 


THE ‘GREEKS 


The ‘‘reino.serenisimo,” the brightest, 
but at the same time one of the hottest 
regions in Europe, owes the scantiness of 
water-supply to its situation in the S$ E 
corner of the Iberian peninsula, where 
it is swept, not like the neighbouring 
Andalusia, by the moist W. wind from 
the Atlantic, but by the parching breath 
of the Sahara, scarcely alleviated by its 
short passage over the Mediterranean. 
The Lebeche, a S. wind resembling the 
scirocco, sometimes covers the entire 
vegetable world with a thick coat of dust 
within a few minutes. Men and animals 
overtaken by it sink exhausted to the 
ground. The Calina, a kind of heat- 
haze, gradually steals over the whole face] | 
of the heavens. Towards the middle of 
July the horizon is girdled with a narrow 
strip of a bluish-red or brownish colour, 
and in August the upper part of the fir- 
mament also assumes a leaden hue, 
across which the light of the stars glim- 


‘mers feebly. The rising sun and moon 


shine red through this haze; mountains, 
trees, and buildings loom through it like 
spectres. Not till towards the close of 
September does the calina disappear. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


IN SPAIN 





The abnormal climate explains the 
other remarkable phenomena of this 
strange land. Among these are the 
treeless mountains; the sudden avenidas 
or floods, occasioned by heavy falls of 
rain at the sources of the rivers; and the 
extensive despoblados, or deserts of hill, 
moor, and salt-marsh, where nothing 
grows except esparto grass and saltwort. 
The few evergreen plants are used by 
the inhabitants as fuel, the only alterna- 
tive being the dried dung of the domestic 
animals. The bulk of the country is oc- 
cupied by the despoblados. Along with 
them may be mentioned the so-called 
Secanos, or ‘‘dry lands,’’ where the want 
of rain in March, the ‘‘key of the year,”’ 
often destroys the entire harvest. The 
February rains are too early; those of 
April find the sprouting grain already 
dried up and the vines scorched. 

The whole agricultural wealth of the 
country is concentrated in the Tverras 
de Regadio, or irrigated districts. While 
the plateau of Albacete produces little 
but grain, wine, and olives, the beautiful 
huertas of Murcia, Totana, and Lorca 
are clothed with forests of orange-trees, 
lemon-trees, and date-palms. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


ad 


VI 





28 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


Perhaps there were more trees in the an- 
cient days, fewer fields and palm-groves, a 
somewhat cooler and more showery climate; 
but otherwise the description will serve as 
a background-setting for the passage of 
the Phocaean ships on their way to Tar- 
tessos. 

As far as Cape Palos the course lies nearly 
south and then, 80 miles below Hemero- 
skopeion, turns abruptly west past a har- 
bour-mouth which has always been a port 
and a stronghold. To-day it is called Car- 
tagena, for centuries it was New Carthage; 
but in the Phocaean days, Phoenicians and 
Carthaginians had established themselves 
here as little as in the Balearic Islands or 
Sardinia. Indeed, at this time, it must 
still have been wholly “Iberian,” the capi- 
tal town of those Massians of whom I have 
just spoken, a town with high walls of 
Cyclopean masonry and next to Tartessos 
the most important place in Spain. Lead 
and iron may have contributed to its 
wealth even in those days, as perhaps did 
also that salting of fish which gave the 
town, if not glory, at least a certain dis- 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


IN SPAIN 


creet fame during the Pax Romana; but 
the great source of prosperity was the silver 
which made southern Spain (one is tempted 
to say it in defiance of etymologies) the 
Eldorado of the ancient world.°® 

Yet we have certain evidence that the 
Phocaeans did not content themselves with 
this goal, but went westward along that 
marvellous southern shore of Spain where 
the coastal strip of lowland is narrow and 
scant, and the backing hills seen from the 
sea in the clear light seem to climb up in 
one sheer great wall to the crests of the 
Sierra Nevada. Here on this coast, not 
very far from the modern town of Malaga, 
the Phocaeans set. ‘“‘the furthest west of 
their towns,” Mainake.° Judging from 
the stray literary evidence, we are bidden 
to look for an alluvial plain by the mouth 
of a stream, opposite an island, some dozen 
miles to the east of modern Malaga; and 
in September, 1922, Schulten succeeded in 
finding a plausible location at the mouth 
of the River Velez where there probably 
was once an island in the river-mouth. 
But though it seems very likely that this 


AND MONOGRAPHS 








Strabo 
III. iv. 2 


VI 





30 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


is the site of the Roman Maenuba, which 
replaced the destroyed Greek town after an 
interval of many centuries, it is not quite 
certain that Mainake itself has thus been 
discovered, since the finds are wholly Ro- 
man and nothing Greek has yet turned up. 

As Malaga nearby was a rival ‘‘ Phoeni- 
cian” town, the destruction of Mainake 
was probably due to the Carthaginians, 
who were not likely to look with favour on 
Greek competition. The centuries have 
since healed the scar; but soon perhaps we 
shall find more exactly the place where the 
ruined little town lay desolate, and sift its 
soil for the tiny traces which will tell us its 
history. From the very start, its life must. 
have been precarious; but as late as 530 
B.C. it seems to have been still flourishing." 
Centuries later, Strabo was to record of it 
that “it is now in ruins, though it still pre- 


- roojserves the traces of a Greek city 


From Mainake it was still two days’ jour- 
ney down to Gibraltar, through the Straits, 
and up the Spanish coast again, past Cadiz 
(the old Phoenician trading stronghold of 
Gadir) to the mouth of the Guadalquivir, 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


PO SPA: TN 


the “‘silver-rooted’? river which floated 
down the silver cargoes from the Sierra 
| Morena mines to the walled town at the 
river’s mouth, Tartessos itself, the fabu- 
{lously wealthy city of King Arganthonios. 

Of this marvellous capital of the West 
we almost know a great deal and yet actu- 
ally know nothing. No Greek description 
of it has survived, uniess we count as such 
the empty words of Avienus (who does not 
know Tartessos from Gades) or the vague 
echoes and memories which cling to the 
accounts of Strabo and others of his kind. 
schulten has recently written a fascinating 
book of ninety pages in which is to be found 
all that record, observation, and conjecture 
can piece together.'’2 He has ventured to 
suggest that Tartessos may be an old Cre- 
tan colony (the name is redolent of Carian 
‘Asia Minor), and that silver and tin came 
thence to the Aegean world. However 
doubtful this may be, it is very generally 
admitted that Tartessos is the Tarshish of 
the Old Testament, whose testimony con- 
cerning it goes back as far as the eighth or 
seventh century B.c.3 It was a walled 


PANDY MONOGRAPHS 


Stesich. 
Jaren 


Avien. 
268 ff. 


Strabo 
PET satel 








a2 


Strabo 
III. ii. 13 


“With — stl- 
ver, tron, tin, 
andlead,they 
traded tn thy 
fairs.” 


Vir. 


THE GREEKS 





town inhabited by an unwarlike people 
who had no fear of the ocean, cruising to 
Brittany for tin and perhaps to Germany 
or the Netherlands for amber. ll the 
wealth of the Andalusian silver mines con- 
tributed to its greatness. Tradition as- 
serted for it a vast antiquity and an ancient 
literature of its own. Carthaginian trade- 
rivalry and greed destroyed it and rased 
its walls to the ground; the Carthaginian 
empire passed over it so potently that the 
very site of it became confused with that 
of its successor, the Phoenician Gades, and 
its empire could become ‘‘so utterly sub- 
ject to the Phoenicians [sc. Carthaginians] 
that most of the cities of Tartessia and the 
nearby places became inhabited by these 
latter.”’¥4 

In Tartessos the Phocaeans—like the 
Phoenicians, who had probably first come 
there fairly long before them—traded for 
silver and for tin; and because these metals 
were the object of their Spanish voyages, 
one would have imagined Tartessos their 
ultima Thule. And yet there is one tell- 
tale indication, an -ussa name, which sug- 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


NTS PAIN 


gests that they occasionally fared still fur- 
ther and were familiar with the Portuguese 
coast as far as the mouth of the River Tagus 
below Lisbon; for Avienus gives us Ophi- 
ussa as the name of the cape (either Cabo 
Raso or Cabo da Roca) by the Tagus 
mouth. This is the last of the -ussa 
names: all that lay beyond was clearly 
unknown to the Phocaeans except by hear- 
‘|say from the Tartessians who worked their 
ships up the Atlantic shore to Brittany 
(and perhaps Britain) for the tin which 
they re-sold to Phocaeans and Cartha- 
ginians.16 

It was late in the seventh century, *4 as 
we have seen, that the Phocaeans first came 
to Tartessos and bid against the Phoenician 
and Carthaginian merchants whose ‘‘Tar- 
shish ships” put in at Gades. Before a 
hundred years were out, the Carthaginians 
gained a forcible upper-hand over their 
Ionian competitors. Following on the sea- 
fight off Alalia (535 B.c.) when Phocaean 
ships defeated the combined Etruscan and 
Carthaginian fleet at the cost of the virtual 
annihilation of their own navy, Carthage 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


33 





VI 


THE ‘GREEES 


seems to have taken measures against the 
Phocaean traders in Spain. She succeeded 
(apparently) in shutting the Gibraltar 
Straits to Greek vessels, so that no more 
Phocaean ships now reached Tartessos. 
But the Phocaeans still held their own 
trading-town of Mainake near Malaga and 
from here they perhaps organised pack- 
train caravans to Tartessos over a moun- 
tain-road,!’ either across the rough Ronda 
hills or by the longer and easier route 
through Osuna and the Sevillian plain. 
Even this inconvenient make-shift seems 
to have been of short duration. Whether 
the famous ‘‘first treaty” between Car- 
thage and Rome is to he dated in 509 B.c., 
whether the allies of Rome include the Mas- 
siliotes, whether the words ‘“‘beyond the 
Fair Cape” have any application to Spanish 
coasting-voyages, are all difficult and per- 
haps insoluble questions: for Tartessian 
history the treaty had best be ignored, ex- 


-|cept as an indication of Carthaginian policy 


and Carthaginian power. But even with- 
out inference from this treaty, it seems cer- 
tain that toward the end of the sixth cen- 





BRYN MAWR NOTES 





PN aS PAIN 


tury the Phocaeans (now residing chiefly 
in Velia and Massilia) were wholly ex- 
cluded from commerce with Tartessos. 
And now, or a little later, Tartessos itself 
was destroyed by the Carthaginians in 
order that Gades might take its place, and 
under this same policy of violent extermi- 
nation Mainake must have given place to 
Malaga. So utterly did these two towns 
vanish from sight that later writers could 
believe that Tartessos was one and the 
same as Gades, and Strabo could correct]a,.a45 
his contemporaries for identifying Pho-|III. iv. 2 
caean Mainake with Phoenician Malaga. 

Whether they willed or no, the Greeks 
had to accept their exclusion from Atlantic 
trade: 


Nightward from Gades none may fare; ° 
Turn back ship’s tackle to Europe’s strand! 


sang Pindar in 461 B.c. And when he re- 
curred again and again to Gibraltar as the 
bourne of enterprise and the limit of safety 
and wisdom, and spoke of the ‘“‘not-to-be- 
trodden salt-sea beyond the pillars” set as|iii. 20 
the end of voyaging, he voiced only the 





AND MONOGRAPHS 


THE GREEKS 


general resignation of Greece to this limi- 
tation of its commerce. It was Herakles 
who set this boundary, says Pindar in this 
same passage; but the Hispanic Herakles 
(as we all know) was a Punic hero! 

With ovxére mpdcw aBarav ada Kidver 
umép ‘Hpaxdéos mrepav evapées, the seal was 
set on the first chapter of the Greeks in 
Spain.*® 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





IN SPAIN 


II. THe SANTA ELENA BRONZES 


ARCHAEOLOGICAL exploration is still in its 
early days in Spain. Tartessos is just on 
the verge of discovery;!2 Mainake awaits 
more certain identification; . Hemero- 
skopeion, unless I have found it, is still un- 
known. And yet I think there is one bit 
of archaeological evidence to confirm the 
early history of Spain as I have just nar- 
rated it. ; 

Far up the “‘silver-rooted”’ river of Tar- 
tessos, which nowadays is called the Guad- 
alquivir, were the mines of the Silver Moun- 
tain (the apyupovy opos of Strabo, “from 
which they say the Baetis flows,’’ and the 
argentarius mons of Avienus). The modern 
town of Linares is near these ancient mines. 
Not so very far north, at Santa Elena be- 
low ‘the pass of Despefiaperros where the 
Madrid-Seville railway crosses the Sierra 
Morena and with it the boundary between 
Castille and Andalusia, an old ‘‘Iberian”’ 
shrine has been discovered and excavated. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


37 


Arch. Anz. 
1922 
Pp. 30-37 


Stesichoros 
(ca.600 B.C.) 


Strabo 
Tit> te it 
Avien. 291 


Map inside 
back cover 


VI 





38 


See Biblio- 
graphy, 
p. 165 


te 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


The spoil consisted almost wholly of little 
votive bronze statuettes; but these were 
turned up not merely by the hundred, but 
literally by the thousand. They are to be 
seen in the Archaeological Museum in 
Madrid, and an illustrated catalogue of 
them (amounting almost to a corpus) is 
ready for publication. ‘Some of them are 
utterly primitive, but most betray a very 
fair skill in casting and a sense for model- 
ling. There is no doubt that they are 
Tartesso-Iberian: the costume of the 
women, the armour of the men, above all 
the artistic style are unmistakable evidence 
of their native origin. Among the thous- 
ands there are, however, three which seem 
to me of capital importance. These I have 
photographed and reproduced on Plates 
IV, V, and VI. 

The little lady who stands on the right 
on each of these three plates is not wearing 
Iberian dress; for Iberian dress character- 
istically is of two types. Sometimes it 
consists of a single-piece cloak covering the 
back and drawn up over the head, mantilla- 
fashion; or else it is a short hooded cloak 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


IV 








eusly_ eyueg WOIj saulinstly ozuolg 


























aera LN 


which flares out below the waist, sometimes 
with pointed tails and sometimes with swal- 
low-tail sleeves—a sort of Little Red Rid- 
ing-hood garment. But the statuette here 
wears an undergarment with sleeves reach- 
ing halfway to the elbow and adorned with 
an ornamental border (which on the original 
bronze may be detected again at the right 
waist, where the outer garment is open); 
and over this ‘‘chiton’”’—for by this Greek 
name we must call it—hangs an overgar- 
ment, open at the right, being fastened on 
top of the right shoulder but passing under- 
neath the left arm. It cannot be denied 
that this costume is essentially Greek and 
essentially Ionic. The face (to which my 
photograph does not do justice) is well- 
modelled, with a surprising softness and 
delicacy about the cheeks. The hair is 
neatly and tidily marked by striations. 
The body-forms under the garment are 
indicated with a discreet emphasis highly 
characteristic of archaic Ionic art. The 
elements of the pose, the raised hand, the 
arm bent at the elbow, the other straight- 
hanging arm with the closed hand pressed 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


39 


VI 


40 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


against the hip, are all familiar from early 
Greek bronze statuettes. The connois- 
seur of Greek art can come, I think, to only 
one conclusion: that the statuette was 
made under the direct influence of late 
sixth century Ionic Greek art. Luckily I 
need not commit myself to a decision as to 
whether it was cast by an Ionic Greek or 
an Iberian pupil of an Ionic Greek, since it 
makes not the slightest difference to the 
argument; but personally I incline strongly 
to the first alternative. 

The little lady who appears on the left} 
of these same photographs shows a less 
happy skill of modelling. Body forms are 
flat and contour clumsy. Features are 
poorly modelled. But the hair and the 
dress and the pose—in short, the whole in- 
spiration—are the same as in her com- 
panion. The Greek prototype is still 
obvious and indubitable. 

With the lady in the centre we approach 
the Iberianisation of the type. The body 
contours are emphatically and carefully 
modelled, but the profile outline (Pl. V) 
sways and runs wild. The outer garment 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





vUa]Y vIULS WIOI] SOULINSIY sZU0Ig 





VI 


euoTy IU WoI} SOULINSYy oOZUOIg 











inaaeA LN 


is no longer Greek, but a sort of compromise 
between polos and mantilla. The face is 
curiously pointed and, seen in profile, large 
and heavy. In short, the Greek strain is 
mixed with an alien one, and, as always, 
loses in beauty but gains in interest by the 
hybridisation. 

In none of the other figurines of Santa 
Elena could I detect more than a faint 
echo of this Greek influence. I could see 
no indication of a Greek prototype in any 
of the male poses and body-forms.  Al- 
though there is in the collection a warrior 
who wears a Greek helmet, this is not an 
artistic criterion, as the rest of his armour 
is Iberian and his artistic style is decidedly 
of that lumpy and clayey kind which is so 
apt to characterise the Iberian figurine. 
In fact, it is only the single type of the 
““Greek”’-clad woman votary that fur- 
nishes evidence for Greek influence; yet 
this evidence is conclusive. 

One further criterion should be borne in 
mind: Greek bronzes (even the archaic 
ones) depend on statue-technique and imi- 
tate the artistic devices and desires of the 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


41 


VI 


42 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


major art, while Iberian bronzes reproduce 
merely the clay (or wax) technique on 
which they are based. After the sheerly 
primitive products of the period earlier 
than the coming of the Phocaeans to Spain, 
Greek bronzes are Greek statues in minia- 
ture; but Iberian bronzes resemble cast 
terracotta figurines. Wherever the Iberian 
tends toward the refinements of statue- 
technique (as in the.three figures on Plates 
IV-VI) it is nearly always possible to detect 
Greek influence. From the photograph of 
the horseman on Plate VII, an uncontami- 
nated Iberian bronze from the south-east 
region, it would be difficult to guess the 
material correctly, so clearly has the “‘clay”’ 


technique left its stamp; whereas no one 


can for a moment mistake the statuary in-| 
spiration in the three ladies or the influence 
of the ‘‘bronze-technique” derived from 
larger statues. But perhaps, since this is 
not a familiar criterion, it can bear even 
more detailed and emphatic stating. 

It is, in fact, the most strikingly distinc- 
tive feature of Greek bronze figurines from 
the archaic period onward that they are 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


Vil 





Iberian Bronze Figurine 


Iberian Bronze Figurine 








foe S PA TN 


treated like statues in miniature. They 
are not castings from puddled clay worked 
up into human likeness, but accurate reduc- 
tions from statuary in which the hewn or 
the graven lines, the smooth and the rough- 
ened surfaces, the folds and ridges and 
hollows have been attentively worked out. 
In a word, they are not a branch of terra- 
cotta but of statuary: they march with the 
major and not with the minor art. On 
the other hand, if one will look closely at 
any ordinary Bronze Age figurine or at 
such typical Iberian bronzes as the horse- 
man on Plate VII or the woman on Plate 
| VIII, one will see that they (like pre-archaic 
primitive Greek work) are derived not from 
imitation of effects painstakingly laboured 
out in a recalcitrant material like stone, 
but from clay or wax which has been easily 
and quickly pushed about and shaped with 
the fingers. There are no sharp edges or 
clear fine lines‘or smoothly polished sur- 
faces, no ponderation or care for the carry- 
ing of the weight. They are clay or wax 
recast in bronze, and nothing more. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


43 


VI 





VI 


THE GREEKS 





But the three charming ladies on Plates 
IV-VI are statues in miniature. The dra- 
pery-folds, the lines in the hair, the indica- 
tion of the little bodies under the dresses, 
the articulation and orderliness of every 
part, the texture and actuality of the over- 
lapping layers of cloth, the cutting of sharp 
edges for eyelids, nostrils, and mouth, the 
smooth surfaces on forehead and cheek, are 
so many echoes of statuary on a large scale 
in bronze or in marble. They are, in a 
word, drawn from the sculptor’s and not 
from the clay-worker’s technique. 

And when, in addition, it is recalled that 
the lady on the right wears Greek not Iberic 
dress, that the lady on the left shows the 
beautiful and orderly fold-lines of the 
archaic Greek method of rendering drapery, 
and that the lady in the centre, though 
wearing a compromise between Greek 
polos and Iberian manitilla, has the tidy but 
emphatic moulding of the bodily contours 
which late-archaic Ionian art loved but 
of which most Iberian art is as innocent as 
it is ignorant—then I cannot anticipate 
that anyone with an eye for the subject 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


eNeoe AlN 


can fail to agree that these three Iberian 
bronzes are the nearest possible blood-rela- 
tives of pure late-sixth-century Greek work. 

Yet one looks in vain for any influence 
of fifth or fourth century styles on any of 
the other figurines from Santa Elena. And 
therefore two points of almost equal import- 
ance stand out: 

(1) There has been direct contact with 
late sixth century Ionic art. 

(2) There is no influence of Greek art in 
its later and more developed forms. 

One may find among these Santa Elena 
bronzes every stage from the crude and 
primitive to the highly developed archaic; 
but beyond that stage, with its frontal 
poses and schematic renderings, this Iberian 
art rarely passes. In one or two more de- 
veloped male poses I thought I could detect 
late Hellenistic or Roman prototypes, as 
though contact with the outside world had 
been re-established. In general, however, 
it is likely that the best work is early and 
not late. At San Isteban, not far from 
Santa Elena, there were found together 
with earthenware of Roman times Iberian 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


45 


VI 


46 


VI 





THE GREEKS 


bronzes of very primitive type. Many are 
only “‘birdbeak”’ heads on atrophied bodies 
as flat as herm-pillars; yet the Roman pot- 
sherds prove that they are to be dated to- 
ward the end rather than the beginning of 
Iberian civilisation. It is thus quite per- 
missible to argue that here in the Anda- 
lusian mountainland the art of casting 
bronze went through progressive degrada- 
tion, starting perhaps as a primitive native 
industry with a vigorous and earnest bent 
for realistic imitation, becoming stimulated 
then by contact with sixth century Greek 
example and instruction, and thereafter, 
when the Greek stimulus had failed, lan- 
guishing and atrophying. 

So interpreted (and it seems to me that 
the interpretation will hold) the Santa 
Elena bronzes support the theory that the 
Phocaeans or their like were in Tartessos 
during the sixth century, penetrating with 
their influence the Guadalquivir valley far 
up to the silver mines at its head, and that 
toward the close of the century they van- 
ished again from the scene. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





IN SPAIN 


III. THe MasstLiotr ne: HOOK 


THE second chapter of the history of the 
Greeks in Spain bears the colophon not of 
Phocaea the Mother-city, but of the fairest 
of her daughters, Massilia, her whom we 
now call Marseilles. She should already 
have had a place in my narrative, for she 
has by now become the most important in- 
fluence upon the eastern coast of Spain. 

The colony of Massilia was founded by 
Phocaea a year or so after 600 B.c.19 Trade 
was of course the objective, and the import- 
ance of the Rhone valley as a trade-route 
into north-western Europe®! was the chief 
reason for selecting the splendid harbor 
east of the Rhone delta. Here Greece was 
to maintain her language and her influence 
almost into the Middle Ages. 

After the Persian capture of Phocaea in 
540 B.c. and the failure of the emigrant 
Phocaeans to maintain themselves in Cor- 
sican Alalia, Massilia must have sorely 
lacked support and been in danger of isola- 





AND MONOGRAPHS 


47 


48 


THE GREEKS 


tion from the Hellenic world through the 
hostile sea-power of Etruria. But it is a 
mistake to look upon this as anything but 
a short period of depression for the Pho- 
caeans in the West. The glory that waned 
in Phocaea brightened again on the south- 
ern shore of France—much as the light 
that Assyria had eclipsed in Tyre had al- 
ready begun to shine more brightly in 
Tyre’s great western colony, Carthage. 
The Phocaean ships which traded in ‘‘the 
fairs of Tarshish’”’ now gave up the long 
Asia Minor journey for the shorter run to 
Southern France. This now became the 
trade-route of the Greeks to Spain. Per- 
haps the Phocaean ships from Velia still 
occasionally crossed the island-bridge and 
brought back the Tartessian tin and silver; 
but Carthage now seems to have succeeded 
in seizing the bridge, or at any rate to have 
rendered it unsafe. The Balearic Islands 
from now on were Carthaginian until they 
were Roman. 

After the fall of Phocaea, then, Massilia 
took over the brunt of the Spanish trade. 
Hemeroskopeion, instead of being the last 





BRYN (MAW Ran Gee 


PN] o PA LN 





gathering-place and harborage on the re- 
turn-journey from Tartessos—a sort of 
Aulis for the journey across the open water 
—sank to a port-of-call for vessels coasting 
northward past Tarragon and Barcelona 
and the Roussillon to Marseilles. 

A strange accident has preserved for us 
the echoes of an old sailing-book, a mar- 
iner’s-description of this voyage from Tar- 
tessos home to Marseilles. The original 
must have dated from about 530 B.c. It 
was written to describe the sea-way from 
the Lands of Tin (or more accurately the 
coasts of Brittany) down the Atlantic 
shore, through the Gibraltar Straits, and 
up the coasts of Spain and Southern France 
to Marseilles. But it must not be imag- 
ined that we have this earliest of ‘‘ Mediter- 
ranean Pilots” in its original form. On 
the contrary, what we possess is a poor 
late-Roman versification by a certain 
Avienus, who translated a Greek school- 
man’s work, which was in turn drawn from 
an earlier Greek historian, who copied 
directly out of the Massiliot sailing-book. 
But the most recent editor of the Ora Mari- 


AND MONOGRAPHS 








THE GREEKS 


tima of Avienus, Adolph Schulten, has suc- 
ceeded in combing out the old Greek por- 
tions from the later accretions and the 
padding and garnishing of the poetaster— 
who lived, be it noted, some 900 years after 
the time when Massiliot ships sailed to 
Tartessos. With this process once duly 
performed, we are left with an invaluable 
account of the geography and ethnography 
of the Spanish coastland in or about the 
year 530 B.c. And though it is now in 
doggerel and at fourth hand, a little of the 
old flavour is there. Under the wretched 
Latin verses a good palate may still detect 
the savour of a finely clear early-Ionic 
prose. 

From the Lands of Tin to the mouth of 
the Tagus below Lisbon the descriptions, 
though accurate, are brief. They rest 
seemingly on hearsay, on the accounts of 
the sailors of Tartessos who brought the 
tin as far as their own Andalusian city. 
But from Tartessos to Marseilles the coast 
is minutely described, obviously by one 
who has himself journeyed it many times. 
True, it is banal enough and dull to read; 





BRYN MAWR NOTES 


INNS PAIN 


but one gains respect for it when one re- 
members what lies back of it or, map and 
commentary in hand, discovers how mar- 
vellously it picks up every sailor’s landmark 
along the Spanish coast. 

Mainake is thus described: 


Soon after these comes the Barbetian range 
And river Malcha, called by the city’s name 
Which once in olden time was Menacé. 
There, hard before the town, an island 
stands, 
Tariessian-owned, which once was dedicate 
By natives unto Her-who-Shines-by-Night. 
-There’s quiet water here, within the isle, 
And harbours safe: above lies Menacé, the 
town. 


This is poor verse (in the Latin as well 
as in my forlorn English rendering), but 
not bad topography. 

If one cares to take a really good modern 
atlas, turn to the map of Spain, find Carta- 
gena at the foot of the east coast, and 
watch the following bit from Avienus for 
the stretch from Cartagena to Alicante, one 
will see, better than I can tell him, what 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





51 


Avien. 
425-31 


VI 


52 


Avien. 
449-63 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


sort of document is this old Massiliot sail- 
ing-book: 


Next, the Namnatian Port near Massian 
town ; 

Curves in from open sea; there with high 
walls 

Above the bay’s head towers MASSIA, 

Next, Treté Cape projects and, close beside, 

The island Strongylé beyond whose edge 

A huge lagoon spreads out behind its banks. 

Then, Theodorus stream (nor be amazed 

That in a place so barbarous and wild 

Here in its name you catch a sound of 
Greece) 

Pours out its flood. Dwelt erstwhile in 
these parts 

Phoenician folk. Thereon, along the shore 

The sands spread out again and islands 
three®! 

Gird wide the coast. Here once the bound- 
ary stood 

Of realm Tartessian, here stood Herna’s 
state. 


Such is our earliest picture of Spain. 


From it we learn that there were three capi- 
tal towns along the coast: Tartessos, chief 
town of the Tartessians; Massia, chief 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


Pe SPAIN 


town of the racially allied and apparently 
politically subject Massians; and Calli- 
polis (Tarragona), chief town of the more 
distantly related and politically independ- 
ent Iberians. All three were walled cities, 
the two latter with imposing fortifications: 
in Avienus, Massia (Cartagena) ‘‘towers 
with high walls”’ Sita altis moenibus) and |; 
Tarragona is 


That famed Callipolis which with vast 
height 

Of rampant walls and lofty battlements 

Touches the sky. 


If I read Avienus rightly, the kingdom 
of Tartessos stretched from Portugal to 
Alicante. North of the latter came hill- 
country belonging to the same folk which 
had colonised the Balearic Islands, distinct 
in dress and race from the Tartessians, very 
likely an older dispossessed folk?? whom 
_|the Tartessians and Massians had driven 
before them when they crossed from Africa 
(but this is full of rank conjecture!). It 
was in this country that the Phocaeans 
had first found welcome and had estab- 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





54 


Strabo 
III. iv. 6 


Steph. Byz. 
s. v. Hem- 
eroskopeion 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


lished their first Spanish town, Hemero- 
skopeion. 

At some later date, Massilia was to add 
two other little towns in the same region, 
though where they lay and what their 
names were we do not rightly know. “‘Be- 
tween the Sucron (River Jucar) and (New) 
Carthage,’ says Strabo, ‘‘there are three 
tiny towns (7odixvia) of the Massaliotes 
not very far from the river. Of these the 
best known is Hemeroskopeion,” which (as 
one may see from this) passed for a Mas- 
siliot foundation in these later days when 
the Phocaean sailing-voyages were all-but 
forgotten. (Artemidoros, however, pre- 
serves the tradition that it was a Phocaean 
colony, @wxaéwy amouxos.) Of the two 
other “‘townlets”’ there is nothing certain 
tosay. It would be an attractive guess to 
venture that one of them was Aldnae, that 
it lay just north of the Cabo de la Nao, 
almost where Javea is to-day and where a 
very precious and well-known gold diadem* 
in ‘‘Greco-Iberian” style was found in 
1904, and that the modern name of the 
little Javea stream, the Jalén, guards an 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





IN SPAIN 


echo of the ancient name. (There is an 
alternative name, Gorgos, which has a curi- 
ously ancient ring to it.) But that would 
after all be a guess in the dark and perhaps 
not a very good one, even though Pom- 
ponius Mela puts his Allone somewhere 
about the Cape, mentioning it after Val- 
entia and before Alicante, and classing it 
as Ilicitanus and therefore south of Cape 
san Antonio, while Ptolemy puts his ’AAwvat 
in the land of the Contestani, who are the 
folk of this cape-land;- and the ’AXdwvis, 
vnoos kal 7oAts MacoaNXias of Artemidoros 
could: be justified by considering the silting- 
up which the Jal6én has occasioned and by 
looking for a palaeopolis on the rocky bar at 
the present. river-mouth. But it is equally 
plausible (and much more usual) to seek 
Alonae further down ‘the coast at the islet 
of Benidorm. The other little town may 
possibly have been the one called Aevkn 
”Axpa, in which case it was certainly situ- 
ated by the beautiful white fortress hill 
which shines. so luminously above the 
modern town of Alicante. For ‘‘Alicante”’ 
is a Moorish rendering of ‘‘Lucentum,”’ 


AMI ONOGR APHS 





Mela II. 93 


Ptol. 


II. vi. 14 


Steph. Byz. 
S. 0. 


VI 


Diod. 


xxv. 10 


Map inside 
back cover 


VI 





THE GREEKS 


and ‘“‘Lucentum” is a Latin rendering of 
Aevxn “Axpa. Yet it is not certain that 
hevk7 axpa is anything but Diodoros’ trans- 
lation of a Punic name, so that there may 
never have been a Greek town at Alicante. 

But I was following Avienus northward 
in his description of the east coast of Spain. 
Beyond the Kingdom of Tartessos (says 
he) in the capeland where the Gymnetes 
had once lived, begins the land of the 
Iberians. Their first town Ilerda is still 
for us moderns to find. But further north 
along the fertile Valentian shoreland were} 
various Iberian towns whose sites are more 
certainly identifiable—Tyris at Valencia, 
Salauris on Cape Salou, Callipolis at Tar- 
ragona,2* and others elsewhere, as far 
north as Barcelona or a bit beyond. Then 
came broken country again, and in the 
foothills of the Pyrenees dwelt wilder peo- 
ple, remnants—as the hillfolk nearly always 
are—of older and forgotten tribes dispos- 
sessed of the fertile lowlands. 

And from here on, the voyage to Mar- 
seilles lies beyond the Spanish border and, 
for our purposes, passes beyond our ken. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





IN SPAIN 


IV. GREEK ART AND IBERIAN 


From literary and archaeological evidence 
it is certain that the Tartessian-Iberian 
civilisation during the sixth and the fifth 
centuries B.C. extended only along the 
coast,2* stretching from the boundary of 
Portugal at the Guadiana River all the 
way into Languedoc in France, with certain 
brief gaps where the mountains came down 
to the shore and afforded “islands” of 
refuge for older people such as the Ibizan 
Gymnetes (of whom some remnants must 
have remained in the mountainous country 
back of the Cabo de la Nao) and the collec- 
tion of more or less savage tribes in the 
shoreland of the Pyrenees. The Tartes- 
sians and Iberians themselves were by no 
means savage, though it would seem that 
the Iberians (in Valencia and Catalonia) 
lagged considerably behind their more ad- 
vanced kinsmen the Massians (in Murcia 
and Granada) and the Tartessians (in 
Andalusia). 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


57 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


The Santa Elena bronzes have already 
shown how Tartessian art was indebted to 
Greek influence. We have seen also that, 
before the sixth century was out, this influ- 
ence was ended, probably because the 
Greeks were excluded from Tartessos by 
the Carthaginians, and very possibly be- 
cause Tartessos itself was destroyed. 
Among the Massians and their northern 
neighbours, Greek influence lasted longer. 
Hemeroskopeion probably endured for 
some time after Tartessos had fallen, and 
the Massiliot ships came to trade at Ali- 
cante and Elche and Cartagena long after 
the southern coast and the straits were 
barred to them by the Carthaginian ships. 
Here in the region of the south-east coast, 
in the province of Murcia, where the Hel- 
lenic contact was the most intimate and 
the most lasting, the Tartessian-Iberian 
art is the most mature and apparently the 
most active. The bronzes found here (e.g. 
Pl. VII) have the most power and vigour; 
the pottery has the finest decoration; true 
sculpture in stone, as far as we know, flour- 
ishes only here; and temple architecture in 





BRYN MAWR NOTES 


IN SPAIN 


stone has (to the best of my knowledge) 
been found in no other region. And yet it 
is a mistake to jump to the conclusion that 
all these arts are derivatives from the 
Greek and were made directly under the 
stimulus of Greek example; for this would 
be wholly false for the bronzes, largely 
false for the pottery, and only partly true 
for the architecture and sculpture. 

To all these arts I shall recur immedi- 
ately; but first I wish to emphasise a con- 
verse proposition. Not merely is the 
native art most mature and most active 
where the Hellenic contact was the most 
intimate and the most lasting, but in the 
rest of the Massian-Tartessian country, 
the shoreland of the south coast from Car- 
tagena to Gibraltar where the Punic hold 
was tightest and the Greeks were earliest 
excluded, it seems that art remained crude 
and inert. At Villaricos at the mouth of 
the Almanzora, half way between Carta- 
gena and Almeria, the excavations of Siret 
have turned up material dating back prob- 
ably to the seventh century B.c. ‘There is 
only the barest indication of Phoenician 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


52 


VI 


60 


Rev. Et. Gr. 
1898, p. 60 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


influence or of Phoenician importation, and 
not the slightest evidence for a flourishing 
Punico-Iberian art. It is a safe prophecy 
that when the Carthaginian stations of the 
Granadan and Andalusian coasts shall have 
been excavated, we shall find nothing to 
alter this opinion. For in matters of art 
the Phoenicians and Carthaginians had 
nothing to teach the natives. They were 
artistically impotent—‘“‘les mulets sont 
toujours stériles,”’ said Théodore Reinach, 
thinking of the hybrid Oriental art, the 
mixture of Egyptian, Syrian and Assyrian 
motives, which these Semites peddled 
about the Mediterranean until, yielding to 
the lustrous spell of the art of their ene- 
mies, they accepted the Sicilian Greeks for 
their masters in architecture and sculp- 
ture,2> for coins and for vases. One has 
only to visit Carthage and the Musée 
Alaoui outside of Tunis to lose forever any 
illusion that recent archaeologists have 
been too severe in their judgment on the 
Punic “‘genius” for art. In these earlier 
days they could not have taught the Span- 
iards to cast bronze or to carve stone, for 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 



























IN SPAIN 


in both these arts they were inferior to 
them in skill. In goldsmithing alone they 
may have exercised an artistic influence 
and stimulated a native industry.® 

But wherever the Greeks were settled 
and were allowed to trade, Iberian art flour- 
ished. And yet, as I have said, Iberian 
art is not mere provincial Greek nor always 
Greek at all. It is this which makes its 
study both fascinating and difficult. 

Let me say, first, that the Greek influ- 
ence is indubitable. 

Most clearly of all is it to be seen in the 
famous bust of the Lady of Elche (Plate 
IX) now in the Louvre Museum.%* The 
winds of controversy have blown about her 
lovely head for nearly thirty years; ‘and 
now, though the gusts have abated, it is 
still doubtful in which quarter we are to 
look for clear sky. The literature has been 
enormous and in some ways profitable, but 
still without finality. There is, however, 
a fair consensus of opinion nowadays that 
there is a Greek strain in the Lady of Elche, 
though I dare say that only a minority 


Dp. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





62 


Rev. Et. Gr. 
1898, p. 59 


VI 


THE GREEKS 





agrees with Théodore Reinach’s ‘‘ espagnol 
par le modéle et les modes, phénicien peut- 
étre par les bijoux, grec, purement grec, par 
le style.” 

And yet, as we come to know ancient 
Iberian things better with the years, the 
Lady of Elche steps more and more apart. 
She comes to live in a region of our mind 
which is shared: only by the most beloved 
things of Greece. Such an experience has 
only an individual and personal value: to 
others it is worthless as evidence. I give 
it first, and then, without any illusion that 
I am adding finality to all that has already 
been written, add some more objective 
arguments: 

1. The very idea of carving an ideal 
human likeness life-size from a piece of 
quarried stone, with accurate indication of 
dress and ornament, enhanced by brilliant 
colour, though not uniquely a Greek idea, 
was not so common in the ancient world as 
we might at first suppose. In general, it 
did not exist in Europe or the Western 
Mediterranean except where and as Greek 
example introduced it. As far as we know, 


BRYN UAW eee 


Ne oP A TN 


it did not exist in early Spain except in 
this region of the ‘‘Greek”’ coast. 

2. The argument that the costume and 
ornamentation are un-Greek is not irrele- 
vant, but wholly relevant. It is precisely 
what we should expect of a Greek sculptor 
filling an Iberian commission. Fifth and 
fourth century Greek artists did precisely 
similar things in working for the Scythians 
of southern Russia, the Phoenicians of the 
Palestinian coast, the Carthaginians,”* the 
barbarous phil-Hellenes of Asia Minor, or 
any other foreigner who chose to be garbed 
and bedizened more suo. 

3. Scrutiny of the profiles of the various 
features of the face (which is somewhat 
difficult because of the great ear-wheels) 
will impress the observer with the great 
beauty and care with which all the curves 
have been worked. But, more than that, 
these are the same geometrically perfect 
profiles which meet us so consistently in 
Greek architectural mouldings and Greek 
vase outlines. Their occurrence here is a 
strong indication of Greek authorship. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





64 


Plate X 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


4. The use of a ruled scale to produce 
symmetry and proportion is characteristic- 
ally, though not exclusively, Greek. The 
device of measuring ancient Greek statues 
minutely for the length and width of every 


}part and of trying to establish numerical 


coherence in all these measurements is 
deservedly in ill-repute among archaeolo- 
gists.6 But if one cares to apply a gradu- 
ated ruler to the frontal photograph of the 
Lady of Elche on Plate XIII of Volume 
IV of the Monuments Piot, one will dis- 
cover that (as far as one can measure by 
such a method) the sculptor laid out the 
features by equal parts or units. And if 
one similarly measures the bronze head of 
the Chatsworth Apollo on Plate I of Furt- 
waengler’s Intermezzi, one will discover an 
agreement with the Lady of Elche which 
is perfect except for a single item (the 
length of the nose and consequent height 
of the eyebrows). The following table 
gives the measurements reduced to com- 
mensurable units, though I am anxious to 
point out that there is no pretence of 
accuracy to the millimetre: 


BRYN. MAWR NOTES 





The Lady of Elche 


semipegoasastengate. 


vo 
se 
A 
ea 
@) 
mal 
yo! 
(93) 
a 
vo 
G 
~ 
tS 
G 
in} 
= 
Fe) 
Ay 
ea 
a 
ve) 
a 
e) 
= 
n 
Y 
x 
4 
0 
vo 
S 
oH 





LN. SPAIN 65 


VERTICAL Lady A pollo 
MEASUREMENTS 
Tip of chin to line of 
vce, | 49h 3 3 
Line of mouth to base of 
Se TE ee St 1% 114 
Length of nose (base to 
TO es eae ws 4 3% 


Height of forehead (to 
upper band of veil or 


Rae 3 3 
Total height of face.... 111% 11 
Bridge of nose to mid- 

level of eyes....... alt 146 1 
Level of eyes to line of 

MCR 2 boas es 4 4 

HorIzONTAL 
MEASUREMENTS 
Length of line of mouth. 3 3 
Length of eye.......... 2 (av.) 2 
Distance between eyes.. 2 2 
Width of face at eye- 

CPE a 8 8 
Width of head between 

ears or earwheels..... 11 (7) 11 





AND MONOGRAPHS VI 


THE GREEKS 


By such a comparison I am pointing 
out that both sculptors set out the parts 
according to the same simple scheme of 
lengths and heights, so as to ensure scale 
and proportions. I believe that the fifth 
century Greek sculptors always worked 
with some sort of measured scale (if only 
because they were intelligent and conscien- 
tious craftsmen) and I consider the occur- 
rence of this practice in the Lady of Elche 
to be a tell-tale indication of Greek work- 
manship. As for the agreement with the 
Chatsworth head, can it be merely a coin- 
cidence that this splendid bronze was 
acquired at Smyrna at the very doors of 
the Phocaean homeland? 

The two heads are stylistically at pre- 
cisely the same stage of development. 
The slight moroseness which, by the exag- 
geration of reaction, was the sequel to the 
“farchaic smile,” has given way to a quiet 
seriousness without animation. The super- 
ficial sources of facial expression have been 
discovered, but the deeper ones, dependent 
on the facial muscles, are still unknown. 
The features are given in their correct 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





LNG 3 PA TN 


general shape, but too simply, without 
understanding of the minute breaking-up 
of all the planes: the geometrically pure 
curve is in every instance given instead of 
the complicated approximation of actual 
flesh and blood, the single curving plane 
instead of the endless variety of surface. 
In both, archaism with its purely orna- 
mental and tidy repetitions of set formulae 
has been overcome. In the Lady of Elche, 
the pellets which ornament the diadem and 
ear-wheels are not all of exactly the same 
size, or spaced at exactly the same interval, 
or aligned with complete strictness; the 
three central ornaments of the necklace are 
not exactly on centre nor do they carry 
down with precision the median line of the 
face; the drapery folds are schematic, but 
not mechanical. In fine, the delightful 
but unliving precision of the late archaic 
has given place to a discreet half-timid 
searching for variety. (I shall have occa- 
sion to remark later that this is a stage of 
development which is never fully reached 
by the pure Iberian sculpture known to us.) 
An un-Hellenic cast of countenance would 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





68 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


not necessarily be surprising (though bar- 
barian portraits scarcely begin till a cen- 
tury later), but here, as the comparison 
with the Chatsworth Apollo shows, it does 
not exist. If one covers with sheets of 
white paper all the outlandish elements of 
the Lady of Elche on a photograph, or 
blocks them out as I have done on Plate X, 
much of the Iberic appearance will van- 
ish. The sunken cheeks may be slight 
gaucherie of workmanship occasioned by 
the unusual difficulty of cutting back be- 
hind the great ear-wheels; but even these 
occur in Greek heads of the period, as in 
the Louvre version of the head of the 
“Apollo on the Omphalos.” 

In short there is nothing left to compel | ° 
us to say that an Ionic artist of Hemero- 
skopeion (or Alonae or Leuke Akra?) could 
not have done the work, and everything 
to lead us to suppose a Greek sculptor’s 
hand and to agree with Reinach’s verdict, 
“espagnol par le modéle et les modes, phéni- 
cien peut-étre par les bijoux, grec, purement 
grec, par le style.” 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





Phe SPA EN 


The Chatsworth head is dated by Furt- 
waengler 465-460 B.c.; and by the editors 
of the Catalogue of the Exhibition of An- 
cient Greek Art at the Burlington Fine 
Arts Club (1904) it is placed in “‘a period 
between that of the Olympia sculptures, 
upon which it marks an advance, and that 
of the Parthenon,” that is to say, around 
455 B.c. Ifthe Lady of Elche is Greek, we 
may give her the same approximate date. 
Since the style, as we have seen, is not 
archaic, but belongs to the last of that 
transitional period which intervened be- 
tween the Persian Wars and the Periclean 
Age, the earliest possible decade is 470-460 
B.c. If we allow for the retardation at- 
tendant upon work in the provinces at a 
distance from the centres of artistic growth 
and change, we should have to believe 460- 
450 B.c. to be nearer the truth. In that 
case, she is good evidence for Greek activity 
in Spain at this period. We shall have to 
postulate a revival of Phocaean-Massilian 
western trade following in the generation 
after the defeat of the Carthaginians and 
Etruscans at Himera and Cumae. Tar- 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


69 


Intermezzi, 
p. 5 


op. ctt. 
p. 11 


VI 





70 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


tessos may be a closed market now; but 
the Massiliot ships are coasting and trading 
as far as Cartagena (which was then Mas- 
sia), and Greek artistic influence is pene- 
trating into the Iberian coast-towns of 
Murcia. 

A second piece of evidence for Greek 
influence in this part of Spain is to be found 
in the famous statues from the Cerro de 
los Santos. 

These extraordinary productions are 
most conveniently to be found in the first 
volume of Pierre Paris’ Essai sur l’Art et 
Industrie de l Espagne Primitive, for long 
the fountain-head of information on early 
Spain for most of us of the outside world. 
As this work is in every archaeological 
library, I shall refer freely to its illustra- 
tions rather than reproduce here material 
so readily accessible. Nor shall I attempt 
to recount what has been told more than 
half a hundred times,?* how Cerro de los 
Santos is a ridge of hills some fifty miles 
inland from Alicante, how the statues were 
found there, how the ‘‘mad watchmaker of 
Yecla’”’ was accused of forging most of 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


Ne Ss PA TN 


them or many of them or some of them or 
none of them, and how all the less-suspected 
of the collection are now on view in the 
Archaeological Museum in Madrid where 
he who runs may stare at their strangeness. 

As to their genuineness, M. Zuazo in a 
monograph on the Cerro de los Santos said 
perhaps the best word (of the many that 
have been said) when he intimated that 
successful mystification at once so bold 
and so prolific would be untrue both to the 
garrulous conditions of life in a Spanish 
village and the unambitious activities of 
the provinical Spanish artisan. As for 
most of them, I have no doubt but they 
are ancient: we shall have to forego the 
charge of spuriousness as too ready a way 
of accounting for their extraordinary style. 
“*Ruol 6’ aropa: adiorapat.” 

The notorious and not-unattractive lady 
on Plate XI?7 (whom the Madrid Museum 
distinguishes laconically as No. 3500) is 
inexplicable without some appeal to Greek 
archaic art in its later forms (circa 500 B.c.). 

The chevron-like folds of the cloak, the 
tassels, the crinkled undergarment show- 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





71 


VI 


72 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


ing at and across the feet, the wispy locks 
of forehead hair, the three pendant braids 
on either shoulder, these are all direct imi- 
tations of the Greek archaic schemata for 
these things. But the primitive eye form, 
the clumsy modelling of hands and feet, 
the severe frontality of the pose, the lack 
of elegance and fineness in the cutting and 
ornamentation are indications that these 
previously mentioned ripe-archaic forms 
are borrowed, being beyond the real stage 
of development of the artisan who has him- 
self barely overpassed the primitive. Al- 
most one might imagine that the man who 
carved this thing had visited in “‘ Helike,” 
had seen the Donna d’Elche fresh in her 
colors and new in her cutting, and had tried 
to do likewise. The mantle of the Lady of 
Elche comes over the shoulder, and down]. 
toward the hands in so much the same man- 
ner, the whole conception is so much the 
same! And yet I am inclined to think that 
the Iberian sculptor learned his methods 
from some predecessor of the Lady of Elche, 
something fuller of the late-archaic loveli- 
ness of precise folds and careful repeti- 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


XI 








¢s. 















“Lady 3500” 


Aull 





Two Statues from Cerro de los Santos 


ENS SPA LN 


tions, the lost Greek work in Spain before 
500 B.c. So precisely can the original in- 
spiration be dated. And yet, for all the 
apparent paradox, although Lady 3500 
was based on Greek precepts of the late 
sixth century, she herself cannot be dated 
back to that period or to any other! 
Though Iberian sculpture endured and was 
active for some four centuries, it never 
developed far beyond its archaic stage. 
Archaic Iberian art in this statue reflects 
late-archaic Greek art: that is all that we 
are allowed to say. In the hey-day of 
Carthage, and in the time of the coming of 
the Roman conquerors, Iberian art is still 
archaic. Whoever doubts this, must look 
at Lady 3502 on Plate XII (left). 

At her breasts this second lady wears 
the rayed full-face of the sun and the profile 
face of the crescent moon—a pair of sym- 
bols dear (in more simplified form) to neo- 
Punic reliefs.28 In her hands she holds a 
cup, from which (as M. Paris puts it) “‘d 
en jaillit des flammes sur lesquelles se detache 
un mouton.” Below these she wears upon 
her dress a richly ornamented and well- 










AND MONOGRAPHS 


74 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


executed panel showing a sea-monster with 
wings and looped Triton-tail, who is darting | 
a florid tendril-tongue over rippling waves 
above which (as far as I can discover) a 
snake-fringed full-faced Medusa mask 
stares down. Figure 1 reproduces a sketch 
based on a pencil-rubbing of the original. 
The style and execution, as one may readily 
see, are not so bad—certainly not so bad 
as many of the other parts of the statue; 
for the lady’s features are ungainly—al- 
though there is an apparent contradiction 
in that eyelids, nostrils, and lips show a 
certain amount of observation and skill— 
hands and feet are hopelessly crude, the 
pose is rigid, the general outline listless and 
heavy, the drapery lines without a vestige 
of grace or variety. Yet the curly-horned 
sheep with his pebbled fleece is astonish- 
ingly naturalistic. Here again, as in the 
case of Lady 3500, we are forced to disin- 
tegrate the elements and to distinguish an 
undeveloped and primitive artisan borrow- 
ing from more developed sources. 

But this time these sources cannot be 
early Greek. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 








76 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


Plate XIII shows the upper portion of a 
Roman statue in the museum at Cherchel 
in Algeria. On the richly and splendidly 
ornamented corslet, among other carved 
figures, are a Triton with wings at his hips 
and a looped serpent-tail ending in a dol- 
phin-fork and, facing him, a centaur whose 
body becomes floral and ends in flowering 
tendrils. The Triton is almost a prototype 
for the winged sea-monster on the panel of 
the Iberian statue, and the centaur’s ten- 
drils are in the same spirit as the tendril 
tongues of the sea-beast. The Medusa- 
mask in the sky recurs on the hanging 
plates of the Roman’s girdle. All the ele- 
ments of the Iberian panel are here, though] 
in different combination. And since these 
ornamented Roman breast-plate statues 
are not uncommon, it is quite possible that 
still more exact parallels can be found.?9 
The Iberian sculptor clearly borrowed |. 
these motives, he borrowed them from an 
art in a much more naturalistic stage than 
his own, the elements are not to be found 
in the Mediterranean until Hellenistic and 
Roman times,** they occur as “dress-orna- 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


XIII 





Detail of a Roman Imperial Statue in the Cherchel Museum 





“S 
“ 





IN SPAIN 


ments”? on the early imperial statues of 
generals and emperors, ergo Lady 3502 
dates from Roman times and suggests that 
Iberian art has moved very little in half a 
thousand years. 

Again, there is to be found in the local 
museum of Murcia a fragment (No. 45) 
from the Cerro de los Santos or the nearby 
Llano de la Consolacion, which shows the 
lower part of the torso of a man wearing an 
Iberian corslet with straps and fringes indi- 
cated in a style common to Roman cui- 
rassed statues.*! 

Most convincing of all, however, are 


certain of the Cerro de los Santos male|Paris, Essai, 
statues whose drapery unmistakably echoes |!: Figs. 231- 


the cut and arrangement and sculptural 
formulae peculiar to the Roman toga-style. 
These statues have a little more freedom 
in the rendering of the third dimension; 
but the pose is still frontal and there is no 
real advance in statuary skill beyond their 
more ancient fellows. The drapery folds 
are utterly stereotyped and conventional: 
the style is lifeless, and the apparent nat- 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


34 


77 


VI 


78 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


uralism is a mere copying and borrowing 
from contemporary Roman models. 

There is plenty of proof that Iberian art 
lasted into Roman times and was not imme- 
diately supplanted by that provincial 
variant of Roman art which ultimately 
produced so many dreary works and left so 
uniform a stamp upon the Spanish penin- 
sula. Under Roman rule, the native in- 
dustries were to linger on for many genera- 
tions before the final stillness of the Pax 
Romana settled down: 

Thus, at Emporion and elsewhere, money 
with legends in Iberic characters was coined 
after the Roman conquest.* 

At Tarragona the “Roman”’ walls have 
Iberic letters or masons’ marks on the 
carefully squared and fitted stones. 

Iberian pottery is often found mixed 
with Roman terra sigillata.*8 

Native gold-smithing continued under 
the Roman occupation; the Tivissa find, 
now in the Tarragona Museum, falls in this 
period.*4 

But the Cerro de los Santos and Llano 
de la Consolacion sculpture is the best evi- 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


IN SPAIN 


dence that, down even to early Imperial 
times, native art according to native tradi- 
tion continued to flourish, albeit modified 
by outside influences. 

I have tried to show, then, that the ini- 
tial inspiration for the Iberian sculpture of 
the Murcia region came from the late 
archaic art of the Greeks, and that there- 
after there is little development until the 
final extinction of the native ateliers in 
Roman Imperial times. But one may well 
demand why Iberian sculpture did not 
continue to profit by Greek precedent and 
Greek instruction and develop as the 
Greeks themselves developed. Why is 
there no Iberian sculpture in the Pheidian 
style, why nothing Praxitelean or Sko- 
pasian or Lysippan? 

Only two answers seem possible: either 
the Iberian sculptors were incapable of 
keeping pace with Greek precedent (through 
technical deficiency, or through a lack of 
understanding and interest) or else the 
contact was broken and the Iberian sculp- 
tors had no opportunity of keeping pace 
with the Greek styles. The first answer— 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


79 


VI 


80 


Plate XII, 
right 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


that the Iberian sculptors were incapable 
—is probably wrong, because we see imi- 
tations from so advanced a style as that of 
Rome and yet no slightest echo of any 
Greek style later than 450 B.c. The 
Iberian sculptors might not have been able 
properly to assimilate Greek teaching; but 
some imitation, however garbled, however 
barbarous, must have shown. On the con- 
trary, we have abundant evidence for the 
existence of a wholly independent Iberian 
style, produced apparently without con- 
tact with any other Mediterranean people. 
To this style belongs a group of statues’ 


{which long lay under the suspicion of for- 


gery; yet the best proof of their genuine- 
ness is precisely their strangeness, their 
utter dissimilarity to any known style, 
ancient or modern. 

Such are the “‘Red Riding-hoods”’ with 
their amusingly naive, but by no means 
characterless, drapery. Here, among lin- 
gering traces of archaic Greek drapery 
lines, are schemata and decorative forms 
which are wholly original. They are| 
archaic by their geometric simplicity, by 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


PNe SPA TN 





their love of repetition and of geometric 
orderliness, by their utter lack of knowl- 
edge of the endless planes and disarrange- 
ments incident to naturalistic imitation. 
They are the same phase (if you like) on a 
different orbit, the same stage of evolution 
of an utterly different mind and eye. Here, 
at last, is native Iberian art, untainted and 
uninstructed, at a point of development 
exactly comparable to that of sixth century 
Greek art, but wholly unrelated to it and 
independent of it in time. For us, with 
our present information, it is undated and 
undatable, except that it probably comes 
later than the Greek and earlier than the 
Roman influence. 

- What else can we imagine it to be, 
if not the product of Iberian art stirred to 
life by Greek influence and thereafter work- 
ing out its own style without further sug- 
gestion or aid? If the guess be right, Car- 
thage must have succeeded in silencing 
Greek commerce here as she had already 
done along the south coast when she 
destroyed Mainake. Thereafter, either 
Murcia was bare of any foreign element or, 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


81 


VI 


82 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


if the Carthaginians established themselves 
here, they brought no sculptural art which 
could impress or instruct the native work- 
men. 

One is led to very much the same con- 
clusion by studying the Iberian pottery of 
the period.» The finds from Elche and 
nearby places are abundant. Enough of 
the material is accessible in the pages of 
the second volume of Paris’ Essai, and in| 
the same author’s Promenades, to give a 
fair idea of the extraordinary style, primi- 
tive but vigorous, without refinement but 
not without force of character, the work 
of a dauber but not of a savage. The 
human representations are horrible; the 
beasts—of which the Elche painters are 
inordinately fond—are quite as bad real- 
istically, but have considerable decorative 
value. They generally occur on bands or 
friezes, much as do the beasts on ‘‘Orien- 
tal” early Greek vases; but they are not 
the same beasts. Plate XIV shows, how- 
ever, some interesting parallels between 
Elche ware and early Greek work. The 
rooster must lose his tail and cockles before 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


vA 
etn 


Li) 





Plate XIV. Animals from Greek and Iberian Vases * 


84 


PL ALY 2 


Pi. XVI, b 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


he can become Iberian, so that we are not 
justified in inferring one from.the other. 
But the Iberian’s rendering of the birds of 
his native land, quail or raven or cormor- 
ant, may have been influenced by a bor- 
rowing of certain Greek tricks of style— 
the general pose, the set of the head, the 
shape of the neck, the panel-feathering. 
So in the beast of prey on these Elche 
vases—the carnassier of M. Paris—the 
native wolf has been substituted for the 
unknown unintelligible panther or leopard 
of the Greek prototype, and rendered by 
the same tricks of style. The thin flanks, 
the stalking gait, the panels left inside the 
silhouette for indication of essential de- 
tails, are all familiar to us from Ionian and 
Corinthian ware. As for the leaping hares, 
it is impossible to believe that the Iberian 
has not learned directly from the Greek— 
especially if one looks at some of the other 
Iberian animals which have been worked 
up “from life’? without Greek assistance. 
Plate XV shows some interesting par- 
allels between vegetabiliar designs on Elche 
ware and Greek vase-drawings taken from 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


ee SRL Oe ee a eee Ne a ee a eee re 





Plate XV. Foliar Designs from Greek and Iberian 
Vases *% 


THE GREEKS 


a Caeretan hydria (perhaps Phocaean?) 
and work produced in Attica under ‘‘east- 
Greek” influence. Plate XVI shows horses’ 
heads from Attic sixth century ware, from 
Elche ware, and from a purely Iberian vase 
from Archena further inland. The case 
for Greek influence upon the Elche horse 
is clearly very fair; but even so, though 
certain similarities of style are very strik- 
ing, there is not necessarily any proof of 
direct copying, of immediate borrowing 
from an original kept before the painter’s 
eye to guide hishand. ‘The Iberian’s fancy 
has been caught by the Greek drawings, by 
the horses and cars, the bands of beasts 
with their separating lines and stripes and] 
ornaments. Himself at a far lower level 
of artistic training, and unequipped with . 
proper tools, the Iberian could not repro- 
duce these wonderfully accomplished and 
civilised decorations; but on his own level, 
for his own world, with his own cruder in- 
struments, he does what hecaninthesame| — 
genre. Instead of fine clear lines, he daubs q 
with heavy strokes, he smudges and wavers 
and bungles on. It is important to insist 





BRYN MAWR NOTES 








Plate XVI. Horses’ Heads from Greek and Iberian : 
Vases 6 


88 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


on his inferior technical equipment and 
his inferior technical knowledge, because 
herein lies the explanation why Iberian 
sculpture is so much better than Iberian 
draughtsmanship. The native sculptor 
could learn directly from the Greek artisan 
who (as may be seen from the Lady of 
Elche) had his atelier in Spain; but the 
native vase-painter could not learn the 
technique of the Greek vase-painter be- 
cause the Greek vases came ready-made 
and were not manufactured on Iberian 
soil. So the Iberian learned the use of 
chisel and mallet, but never fell heir to the 
Greek feather-brush or clean colours or 
lustrous varnishes. He learned to carve 
almost as a Greek might, but not to draw. 

The Greek parallels which I have ad- 
duced belong to the sixth century and are 
characteristic of Ionian and Corinthian 
ware. Though it is not wholly impossible 
to find material in certain earlier ‘‘ Oriental- 
ising”? Attic work, yet the wonderful draw- 
ings of the Attic potters of the developed 
black-figure and the still more marvellous 
red-figure periods find no echo in Iberian 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





Plate XVII. Ornamental Detail from Greek and 
Iberian Vases % 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


|ware.% The potters of Elche were never 


pupils in that great Attic school of draughts- 
manship which explored with such enthu- 
siasm the possibilities of line for rendering 
the human figure in action and at rest. 
Yet later, the contact begins again with 
unmistakable borrowings from late fifth 
or fourth century Greek styles. Twining 
tendrils and curling volutes among palm- 
ettes abound on the early Ionic vases, 
but it is not until the late red-figure style 
that they lose their stiff and formal bal- 
ance, and run over the vase-surface, rank 
and luxuriant, with twist and counter- 
twist, throwing off volute after volute, with 
a leaf or a palmette within every nascent 
curl. On Plate XVII it is obvious that the 
Iberian has been borrowing from the Greek; 
the meaningless vagaries of the one find 
their explanation in the intelligible details 
of the other. Now, in searching for par- 


jallels I have always tried to find as old and 


as early ones as possible; but for most of 
the decorative tendrils of the Elche vases 
one cannot go back of fourth century 
Greek ware for really adequate compari- 





BRYN MAWR NOTES 


ene ee A TN 


sons. It is not merely a question of detail; 
the whole spirit and style are clear and un- 
mistakable. 

Here, then, is a baffling state of affairs in 
which animals derived from sixth century 
Corinthian and Ionian ware are accom- 
panied by decorative motives from fourth 
century “‘South Italian” Greek ware, while 
the intervening hey-day of Attic vase- 
-|painting leaves no mark, 

There was a time when Iberian pottery 
was classed as a sort of late-Mycenean 
product; but this theory was abandoned 
when more careful excavation showed that 
this pottery is never found with material 
that can be dated further back than the 
fifth century B.c. Most generally, if it can 
be dated at all, it falls in the fourth, third, 
and second centuries. In the Murcia 
region it has often been found with frag- 
ments of Greek Campanian ware, and in 
many parts of Spain the Iberian pottery 
turns up with the Roman terra sigillata. 
As far as we know at present, then, we are 
not dealing in the Elche ware with vases 
contemporary with the Corinthian and 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


91 


VI 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


Ionian beast-art, but at least a century or 
two later. 

We shall have to conclude that, like the 
Cerro de los Santos sculpture, the Elche 
ware is the product of a stagnant art set 
in motion by archaic Greek example, iso- 
lated for a time and abandoned to its own 
resources, and then brought in contact 
again with Greek art now too far advanced 
and too sophisticated—perhaps already 
too decadent. The Elche beasts are the 
crude repetition in the fourth or fifth gen- 
eration after the Corinthian and Ionian 
beast-art ceased to come to Spanish shores, 
and the unessential and trivial tendrils and 
ivy-leaves which serve as space-fillers are 
the meagre profit drawn from a re-estab- 
lished contact with Greek vase-painting 
now senile and impotent. 

Shall we some day dig up Iberian ware 
of the sixth century more correctly and 
directly imitative of Ionian products? Or 
shall we have to conclude that the Iberian 
potters were stimulated into imitation! 
only after the Greek supply failed and the 
peddlers of wine and oil and perfume in 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 








Neo PA TN 


earthen pots no longer drew up their ships 
on the Murcian sands? It will be interest- 
ing to have the answer. 

The Iberians certainly made pots before 
the Greeks could offer them theirs, because 
most of the Iberian vase-shapes are inde- 
pendent of the Greek, and this would 
surely indicate that the industry is older 
than the Greek influence. With these 
indigenous shapes goes the crude decora- 
tion based on concentric circles and fan- 
shaped arrangements of concentric arcs. 
But even in the shapes, some Greek influ- 
ence is certain; for we find the native pot- 
ters imitating the Greek kylix or wine- 
cup.*? 

There is also another argument: the 
“pictorial,” as opposed to the merely geo- 
metrical, style flourishes first and most 
vigorously in the south-east, the region of 
Hemeroskopeion. Later it is to be found 
up-coast at Emporion, at that time the 
centre of Greek influence, and only in the 
latest times does it manage to work its 
way inland, where a final period of energy 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


93 


VI 


94 


See 
Chronolo- 
gical Table 
on p. 180 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


marks the last blazing-up of Iberian fire 
across the Roman twilight. 

Late in the sixth century the Greeks van- 
ished from the Murcian coast; a century 
or so later, they were back again with their 
wares but not again so strongly established 
in the land. This seems the only feasible 
inference, if the foregoing analysis of Ibe- 
rian vase-designs is right. The Cerro de 
los Santos sculpture led to nearly the same 
conclusion, except that there was no fourth 
century resumption of Greek influence. 
The Lady of Elche suggests that on the 
coast, at least, Greek influence returned as 
early as 460-450 B.c. 

I wish it were possible to interrogate 
Iberian architecture as a third witness, but 
in his present condition he resists question- 
ing. And yet, in so far as any testimony 
is forthcoming, it is in accord with that of 
the vases and the sculpture. There are 
some fragments of mouldings, carved in 
local stone, found in the Elche regions, and 
illustrated in Paris’ Essaz. Plate XVIII 
reproduces such a fragment,® said to have 
been found at Llano de la Consolacién 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


XVIII 





A Fragment of Iberian Architectural Moulding 








ENS PUA IN: 


(which is in the same region as the Cerro de 
los Santos) and now in the Madrid Archae- 
jological Museum. A second piece, resem- 
bling an anta-cap, is now in the Louvre. 
Both of these fragments show an egg-and- 
tongue surmounted by a bead-and-reel and 
crowned by a tiny flat headband. Though 
they differ in the shape of the ovolo, both 
have the dart or tongue buried so as to be 
nearly invisible between the shields, and 
both show the heavy and clumsy forms 
characteristic of archaic Ionian architec- 
ture.38 We thus have still another indica- 
tion of sixth century Ionic influence stimu- 
lating an Iberian imitative school; but the 
finds are still too inadequate to permit any 
further inferences as to the growth and 
career of this ‘“‘Ibero-Ionian”’ architec- 
ture;** 

And so we have seen how the arts of 


Greece came to the shores of Spain and 


awakened by their example a Spanish de- 
sire to do likewise, to build temples and to 
carve statues and to paint vases. And for 
all these we must look first to the Pho- 
caeans and Massiliotes, the bringers of the 


AND MONOGRAPHS 








Paris, 
Essat, 
I, Fig. 3] 


VI 





96 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


olive and the vine to western lands. 
Interrupted by their Punic rivals, they 
seem never quite to have lost their hold on 
Murcia but to have traded along the coast 
and fetched the Massian ore. In the fam- 
ous second treaty between Carthage and 
Rome in 348 B.c. (?) Rome and her allies 
—among whom must certainly be reck- 
oned Massilia—are expressly permitted to 
trade as far as Cartagena, and this clause 
probably merely sanctions an already ex- 
istent state of affairs. A century later 
when Hamilcar comes to Spain and when 
in 221 B.c. Carthago Nova is founded, even 
the Murcian trade comes to an end. Per- 
haps at this time Hemeroskopeion and the 
other Greek posts were destroyed. In 
consonance with this interpretation, the 
vase-fragments which I picked up at Hem- 
eroskopeion indicated that the Greeks were 
still there in the fourth and third centuries 
B.c.; but until Hemeroskopeion has been 
excavated we shall be unable to conjecture 
more definitely how strong or how lasting 
was their hold here upon Spain. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


PS PA TN 


V. AMPURIAS 


|THE final chapter of the history of the 
Greeks in Spain is written in the north be- 
neath the Pyrenees, close to the French 
frontier. As early as the later sixth cen- 
tury, when the island-bridge was aban- 
doned and Massilia took the place of 
Phocaea, there was need for a way-station 
between Hemeroskopeion and Marseilles. 
Very naturally the Greek ships put in at 
the great bay under the spurs of the Pyre- 
nean mountain-wall, the modern Golfo de 
Rosas. There, as Avienus says, 


Between these reefs a harbourage lies spread 
Where by no blasts is vexed the water-flood, 


and there, later than the time of Avienus’ 
original source, the Massiliotes set a little 
trading-post which grew in time to a sizable 
town. Its old name, Emporion, still lingers 
in the modern name Ampurias; and here, 
close to the tiny village of San Martin, the 
old Greek town itself has been laid bare by 
modern excavation.‘° 


Ae MONOGRAPHS 





98 THE GREEKS 


The site to-day presents the usual pic- 
ture of crossing walls and overlying layers 
which attend upon a town inhabited 
through the centuries. A plan of what 
exists to-day is not a plan of Emporion;* 
it is a fragmentary version of the composite 
plan of all the successive aspects, Greek, 
Hellenistic, and Roman. Correct excava- 
tion has, of course, supplied the clue to 
these complications, since the pottery-finds 
determine the dates and levels. The visitor 
to Ampurias, in fact, stands above the ves- 
tiges of four superposed Emporia, which 
may be called in terms of their character- 
istic pottery: 

The Roman or Arretine level (second 

century A.D. to second century B.C.) 

The Hellenistic or Campanian level (sec- 

ond century B.c. to fourth century B.c.) 
The Attic level (principally fifth cen- 
tury B.C.) 
The Ionic level (480 B.c. to 530 B.c.) 


As the spade descends, therefore, it passes 
through the Roman, the Hellenistic, and 
the Greek levels to the level of the original 
foundation; but of this last the remains 


VI BRYN ‘MAW Os 


PNY SPATEN 


are so extremely scanty that it is fair to say 
that we know nothing of the primitive 
town. 

_ Even the date of its foundation is uncer- 
tain, except that we can be sure that it does 
not go back to the Phocaean days before 
540 B.c. There is nothing of the early- 
Ionic about the Ampurias finds. There 
are no seventh or early sixth century ob- 
jects of Phocaean trade or industry—early 
“Rhodian”’ or “ Milesian” ware, Ephesian 
and Samian bronzes—unless a little sphinx- 
relief is to be so classed. And we must 
remember that Avienus does not even 
mention Emporion when he has occasion 
to speak of the great bay on which it stood. 
Here is clear proof that the town did not 
exist at the time of the original sailing- 
book, and this (as Schulten shows) must 
have been after the battle of Alalia in 535 
B.c. The pottery finds thus agree with 
this literary inference in dating the founda- 
tion of Emporion very late in the sixth 
century. ‘‘Orientalising” sixth century 
ware occurs, but in very small quantities; 
black-figure ware is common, but it is 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


99 


VI 


VI 


THE GREEKS 





obviously decadent and late, not earlier 
than 500 B.c.; instead of the copious Cor- 
inthian, Chalcidian, and early black-figure 
Attic which one would expect on a sixth 
century site, Frickenhaus could catalogue 
scarcely two dozen fragments of such 
ware.” In 1923 a piece of a late sixth cen- 
tury “Augenschale” with a tiny black- 
figure satyr showing beside a large red- 
white-and-black eye was discovered and 
counted as a rarity. And since almost in- 
variably the lowest pottery level at 
Emporion contains only red-figure or 
decadent black-figure ware (and with these 
the soil is studded), the conclusion is clear: 
Emporion may date back as a trading-post 
to 525 or so, but as a settled town it is not 
much older than the year 500 B.c. It was 
therefore a Massilian and not a Phocaean 
foundation. 

Of the original trading-post we know 
nothing, unless we may infer that it began 
on the little rocky hill of San Martin (which 
is now above a sandy mainland beach, but 
was once a tiny island) and thence moved 
to the nearby shoreland within a girdle of 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


XIX 


| eens 





Emporion, the Gate-Towers 





Emporion, Detail of the Town-Walls 





IN SPAIN 


now-vanished walls to keep off the now- 
long-since-vanished Indigetes. 

Nor do we really know very much of the 
Emporion of the fifth century, except that 
the plentiful vase fragments indicate that 
the town now began to prosper. Perhaps 
it was during this period that those fortifi- 
cation walls were built whose southern 
tower-gate still shows conspicuously to-day. 
As may be seen from my photographs 
(Plates XIX and XX), these walls were 
built of large blocks of unequal size, fitted 
without mortar, on rather regular hori- 
zontal beds, but without concern for the 
vertical joints. Plate XIX shows the re- 
mains of the two towers, the one very con- 
spicuous in the foreground, the other quite 
small in the right background. Between 
the two, the walls run back and then turn 
toward each other to form a gate with 
opening wide enough for a cart to pass. 
Hinge-sockets and bar-slots for the gate 
are still to be seen at either jamb. 

Within these ramparts lay a town of no 
great size, with small unpleasant houses 
and narrow streets, dirty no doubt and 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


101 


VI 


102 


Hdt. I. 153 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


ill tended, through which the cold north 
winds off the Pyrenean snows blew with 
that invigorating but all-penetrating fury 
which the modern visitor, even in late 
autumn, will learn to dread. Here, too, 
there must have been that open square, or 
agora, for markets and for meeting-place, 
which was to the ancient town what the 
open courtyard was to the ancient house. 
In addition to this ‘‘ place in the middle of 
their city where they come together to 
cheat each other and forswear themselves” 
(as the bazaar-bred Mede contemptuously 
called it), Emporion apparently already 
had at this time its shrine to Asklepios; 
and outside of the town altogether, on the 
nearby island where the Massiliotes first 
ventured to set a trading-post, probably 
stood a little temple of Ephesian Artemis, 
whose cult had come from Phocaea to 
Marseilles. Strabo describes Emporion 
(and excavation has confirmed his descrip- 
tion) as a double town containing a Greek 
quarter and a native quarter, both within 
a common girdle of defences, but distrust- 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


Pee AYN 


fully partitioned off by an intervening 


inner wall: 





103 


And their city [he says] is a double|Strabo 


' one, for it has been divided into two 
cities by a wall, because in former times 
the city had for neighbours some of the 
Indicetans, who, although they main- 
tained a government of their own, wished, 
for the sake of security, to have a com- 
mon wall of circumvallation with the 
Greeks, with the enclosure in two parts 
—for it has been divided by a wall 
through the centre; but in the course of 
time the two peoples united under the 
same constitution, which was a mixture 
of both Barbarian and Greek laws—a 
thing which has taken place in the case 
of many other peoples. 


We know very little more than this 
about the appearance of Emporion in the 
fifth century; but the fragments of pottery 


_|show that commerce was growing greatly 
and that Massilia was in trade-relation 


(directly or indirectly)with Athens. Every 
decade in the fifth century can be illus- 


trated by fragments from Attic workshops. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


ITT. iv. 8, tr. 
H. L. Jones 


VI 


104 


Appendix 
III 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


I am fortunate in being able to reproduce 
the finest of these fragments on Plate XXI. 
The design is drawn in clear firm lines of 
luminous black, with a most marvellous 
accuracy and a most engaging delicacy. 
Over all, and through all, there breathes 
that spirit of freshness and loveliness 
which stirred only once in the ancient 
world. Even Attic painters (who lavished 
their enthusiasm more on boys and youths) 
rarely succeeded in drawing maidens with 
such sympathy and charm. It is scarcely 
surprising that a master’s hand betrays 
itself here, to be easily and surely detected. 
The fragment may be attributed without 
hesitation to the workshop of Makron; a 
vase of his in the Metropolitan Museum in 
New York is its immediate relative. It is 
most interesting that the work of the best 
potter of his day should have come to a 
small and distant trading-town in Spain. 

But the excavation of Ampurias has 
brought to light a more surprising instance 
of Attic art, to give yet more eloquent 
evidence for the prosperity and ¢tAoKaXNia 
of the ancient town. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





AXT 





i0n 


Fragment from Empor 


ase 


BY: 


The Asklepios of Emporion 





Pe OPA EN 


The statue of Asklepios (Plates XXII- 
XXIV) was found in pieces in a Roman 
cistern close to the platform of a small tem- 
ple, within the town and not very far from 
the tower-gate. The great size of the 
statue, the evident costliness of it, the lack 
of interest in the execution of the back, 
‘make it certain that it was a cult statue set 
up within a temple, no doubt upon the 
very platform beside which it was found. 
The substructure of this temple-platform 
is built of large blocks of hewn stone care- 
fully fitted without mortar on level hori- 
zontal beds with vertical joints, a style of 
masonry likely to occur in the late fifth or 
the fourth century B.c. and rather anoma- 
lous for any later period. The temple on 
this foundation must have housed a con- 

{temporary cult-statue; but our Asklepios 
has been generally taken for late Hellen- 
istic or Roman work.®? I shall try to show, 
quite the contrary, that in this statue the 
Barcelona Museum possesses that rarest 
of rare things—an original statue of Attic 
workmanship of the close of the fifth cen- 
tury B.c. It is, in fact, the original dedi- 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


105 


VI 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


cation, and not some later substitute, which 
has waited underearth for the modern exca- 
vator. 

The god, nearly twice human stature, 
stands quietly erect in the typical Pheidian 
pose, one foot planted flat and firm to carry 
the main weight, the other set slightly 
further back with sole tilted inward, bend- 
ing the knee and thrusting it a little for- 
ward. Sostand many of the late fifth cen- 
tury and early fourth century Attic statues 
—the Medici Athena, the Vatican Deme- 
ter, the Athena Giustiniani—and the 
figures on Attic tomb reliefs. ‘The swing- 
ing line occasioned by this uneven distribu- 
tion of the weight dies out at the waist, and 
there is no echo to it or countercurve in 
the broad and level shoulders or the erect, 
splendidly carried head. It is the solid and} 
heavy Attic ponderation which was even- 
tually swept aside by the brilliantly bal- 
anced chiasmus of the Polykleitan pose 
and its derivative, the Praxitelean.® 

In the torso there are obvious traces of 
lingering archaic formulae in the strongly 
outward sloping chest and the ‘‘exterior”’ 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





IN SPAIN 


shoulders (which produce an impression 
that the arm hangs suspended beside the 
torso instead of being set into its socket). 
The deltoid muscles, the groove of the 
breastbone, the boundaries of the breast 
muscles are simple and overemphatic as in 
most mid-fifth century work. The planes 
in the nude are large and rather flat; there 
is no elaboration of the surface modelling. 

The drapery is extremely simple in line. 
Over the quasi-nude right leg run hanging 
curves, which originate as far as possible 
on the other hip and dip successively lower 
and lower to model the thigh and calf and 
shin with their curvature. The lowest and 
longest of these hanging curves is repeated 
five or six times almost in parallel, conceal- 
ing the left leg with a wealth of folds and 
bringing a great swinging line from the 
right ankle up and across to the left waist. 
A mass of vertically folded drapery hangs 
clear of the body on its left, and re-empha- 
sises the vertical element of the pose. The 
torso is nude except for a heavy line of 
crumpled drapery running diagonally from 
the left shoulder to the right waist where 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


107 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


it turns into looped folds which echo the 
catenary curves on the thigh below. The 
drapery-folds of the back merely carry on 
the lines from the front and return them 
toward the left shoulder without particular 
care or regard for modelling or composition. 
The back, we may assume, was not in- 
tended for public view. 

One may find just such drapery in the 
work of the pupils of Pheidias. There are 
fragments from the reliefs of the Basis of 
the Nemesis by Agorakritos,44 which show 
the same looping drapery-folds with up- 
turned gutter-edges across the bent leg, 
running into deep vertical clefts between 
the legs. The same free drapery hangs 
vertically with undercut shadows at the 
statue’s left; the same crumpled belt of 
overhanging drapery runs from the right] 
waist to the left armpit. Even the profiles 
of the drapery-folds are in many instances 
identical. 

Another interesting parallel is the mar- 
shal at the south-east corner of the Par-} 
thenon frieze. Here again there is the 
same system of catenary drapery-lines over 





BRYN MAWR NOTES |. 


XXIII 





The Asklepios of Emporion 


XXIV 





The Asklepios of Emporion : 


IN SPAIN 


the bent right leg, the same long lines pull- 
ing across from the inside of the right leg 
to the left waist with its heavy, vertically 
pendant folds, the same crumpled belt of 
overfolded drapery. The lines of the Askle- 
pios drapery are severer and less graceful, 
yet surer and more powerful than these of 
the Parthenon frieze; but the kinship of 


style is clear. The Parthenon frieze is| 


probably the work of the same Pheidian 
School in which Agorakritos was promi- 
nent. 

Other comparisons lead to the same con- 
clusion. Thus, the head, weathered rather 
more than the rest of the statue, has the 
leonine and massive hair common in the 
Pheidian School. Deep drill holes, often 
several inches in length, divide the large 
locks which have no graved lines upon 
them, nor sharp edges, though otherwise 
they are formal enough in shape and are 
carefully balanced, with complete sym- 
metry on the forehead and in the beard and 
with carefully adjusted irregularity beside 
temples and cheeks. The invisible crown 
of the head is rough hewn, and shows a 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


109 


Plate 
XXIV 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


cutting for an attachment of some sort. 
There is no clear dividing line between 
forehead and hair or between beard and 
cheek. The forehead has the bar strongly 
emphasised, but without any further indi- 
cation of the muscles or of the bony struc- 
ture of the eyebrows. The eyes are large 
and extremely prominent, with an unnat- 
urally large lower lid. The whole shape 
of the face is rectangular and the effect 
massive and heavy. ‘This effect is empha- 
sised and increased by the abnormally 
broad neck which carries down the cheek 
contour. 

This sketchy treatment of the hair is not 
(as many have apparently thought) an 
evidence of late date or of the hand of the 
copyist. On the contrary, it is highly 
characteristic of the pre-Praxitelean Attic 
School whose methods were merely elabo- 
rated and exaggerated by Praxiteles in the 
Olympia Hermes. It occurs frequently on 
the Parthenon frieze and on fourth cen- 
tury Attic grave-reliefs.46 In larger sculp- 
ture, the beginnings of the style are very 
apparent in the famous Laborde head, 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 








IN SPAIN 






probably from the Parthenon pediments;*’ 
and it is already fully developed in the 
heads from the Nemesis basis. 

As for the features, they occur on the 
Parthenon frieze and in the ‘‘Zeus” head 
in the Boston Museum which is usually 
taken as one of our most faithful versions 
of the Pheidian tyne.*® 

The god wears a single garment, hung 
over one shoulder, and wears richly worked 
sandals. In his hands he seems to have 
carried a sceptre and a drinking-horn with 
a decorated top or lid. The sceptre is to 
be inferred from the position of the fingers 
of the hand found with the rest of the 
statue: the upper part of the drinking- 
horn was turned up in excavation. Beside 
him curled up a gigantic serpent. The 
draped portion of the statue together with 
its roughly pebbled plinth are cut from a 
single piece of marble; the head and nude 
torso form a second piece; the join between 
the two parts was concealed by the edge 
of drapery. The snake was cut separately 
and set in place. 



























AND MONOGRAPHS 


112 


VI 


THE iGR heas 


The material is (as far as I can judge) 
Pentelicmarble. Itis very finely crystalled 
and has taken on a beautiful rich golden- 
brown patina. The two pieces have not 
weathered equally, which may easily be 
due to the fact that they did not lie together 
in the ground. 

Among details of execution it is particu- 
larly worthy of notice that, though the 
chiselling of the nude portions shows com- 
paratively little vigor and life, the up- 
turned ‘“‘gutter’’ edges of the drapery are 
wonderfully crisp and sharp with deep hol- 
lowings-out of the channels. In fact, 
everywhere in the draped portion there is 
that freshness and fire, that endless chang- 
ing of edge and surface which distinguishes 
original Greek work of the best periods 
from the tranquil smoothness and com- 
parative lifelessness of even the most con- 
scientious Roman copy. 

It is not in the least plausible to main- 
tain that a copyist could have been so 
accurate in all the less popular elements of 
the post-Pheidian style. The very things 
to which the ordinary museum-goer objects 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





PN] S PAIN 113 


in this statue—its clumsiness, its lack of 
surface charm, its over-emphatic clarity of 
line and surface—are also the very things 
which a Roman copyist would have altered 
or toned down. But the chief reason for 
believing the statue to be an original is the 
complete absence of any reason for sup- 
posing the contrary.‘® 

It was, perhaps, not the work of a lead- 
ing sculptor and surely not cut by the 
chisel of Agorakritos himself; but it was 
made in the Attic workshops during the 
lifetime of Agorakritos and his colleagues, 
paid for by some Massiliote or Emporionite 
and (being made in two pieces for readier 
transportation) shipped to this little town 
in Spain, to become the ornament of its 
temple and the pride of its citizens. 

If the Asklepios is an original from the 
last of the fifth century, imported from 
Athens, it is evident that Emporion must 
have been flourishing at this time. The 
Carthaginian shadow which eclipsed Mai- 
nake and dulled Hemeroskopeion scarcely |Contra 
cast a penumbra over Catalonia. Here in|Polyb. 
the north, apparently, the Greeks were safe, are 


AND MONOGRAPHS VI 









Plate XXV 














THE GREEKS 


and here their commerce prospered. Yet I 
am much at loss to know in what that com- 
merce could have dealt. The silver mines 
of Andalusia and Granada were shut to 
them, and Marseilles had eluded her Punic 
rivals by bringing tin from Brittany wa 
the Bay of Biscay and a land-road through 
southern France, so that there can hardly 
be a question of a Catalonian trade in either 
of these metals. The Ampurian hinterland 
is fertile and pleasant enough, with no 
obvious difficulties of communication; but 
the inhabitants in those days were little 
civilised, with little to offer the Massiliote 
in exchange for his wares.® 

And yet Emporion continued to grow, 
and by the Hellenistic period the town is 
clearly of moment and, by the evidence of 
her abundant coinage,®° she is rich. Her 
houses were enlarged or rebuilt, to con- 
form with the usual Hellenistic type, her 
streets were widened, her agora enlarged; 
new temples were erected, and new statues 
set up. A much-admired fragment of a 
post-Praxitelean statue, now in the Barce- 
lona Museum, shows that the artistic tastes 





BRYN MAWR NOTES 


XXV 








A Marble Head from Emporion 


> 





IN SPAIN 


and traditions of the town continued, and 
that the artistic xown of the Hellenistic 
world was spoken and understood on Span- 
ish shores. Here, then, last and most 
fully, the Greek left his mark in Spain. 
And lastly came the Romans, after 
Emporion had reached its prime; and the 
Hellenistic town, like Hellenistic towns in 
all the Mediterranean, adjusted itself to its 
new status without wholly losing the cus- 
toms and memories of the vanished Hel- 
lenic years. No doubt it was better to 
belong to Rome than to Carthage; - for 
Massilia had ever been a staunch friend to 
Rome, and when in 218 B.c. Hannibal held 
all the rest of Spain, Gnaius Scipio was able 
to use Emporion as his base for a Roman 
counter-attempt, and thereby got foothold 
in Iberia. That, and the privileges of|Polyb. III, 
Marseilles, were not likely to be forgotten|?>' 1 7 


by Emporionites. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





116 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


It was a long time since the Phocaeans 
rode the Balearic surge and swung their 
ships around the windy tower of Hemero- 
skopeion, and I confess that these later days 
attract me less. J am ready to plead my 
task accomplished and to say that I have 
done what I could to make testimony where 
nearly all is dumb and, out of somewhat 
less than shadows, to conjure up the coming 
and the passing-away of the Greeks in 
Spain. 


“Explicit iste liber: scriptor sit crimine 
liber.” 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





Piers A TN 


APPENDICES 


I. THe Site oF HEMEROSKOPEION 


(For the meaning of the name ‘Hyepo- 
gxoTetov, consult note 53 in the Com- 
mentary). 

AVIENUS, our oldest source, makes nolo. M. 
mention of Dianium. Strictly, he says no|476-78 
more than that Hemeroskopeion is some- 
where near Ilerda (quoque hic) which was 
the first of the Iberian districts (prima 
eorum civitas) and lay south of Cape San 
Antonio (five miles east of Denia). This 
is to be inferred from the statement in 
Avienus that the sandy shores begin be- 
yond Ilerda (litus extendit dehinc steriles 
harenas) and the fact that the Valencian 
shore is sandy as far east as the cape just 
mentioned. Of the actual site Avienus 
says that it is now desolate and marked by 
a lagoon or marsh (nunc iam solum vacuum 
incolarum languido stagno madet). As 
Schulten indicates, this remark cannot be 
ascribed to the Massilian original in whose 
time Hemeroskopeion was in full vigour, 
but only to Avienus himself or possibly to 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





118 


Plate III 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


the late Greek versifier whom he seems to 
have translated. At Denia there is no 
sign of a marsh, nor, as ocular inspection 
will convince one, the least likelihood that 
a town around the foot of Denia hill could 
have become involved in marshland, since 
there is no river here to perform the trans- 
formation. Schulten, who clearly agrees 
in this opinion, offers the unlikely explana- 
tion that stagnum means the open sea and 
not a lagoon at all (p. 109, significatque 
stagnum mare, nam stagnum ad oppidum 
Denia nullum est). But it seems highly 
doubtful that Denia was already vacuum 
incolarum at the time Avienus wrote 
(‘‘ Floruit exéunte saeculo IV p. C.”—Schul- 
ten) whereas Hemeroskopeion had almost 
certainly been destroyed for a long time. 
At Ifach, on the other hand, the languidum 
stagnum of Avienus still exists as a salina 
or basin of standing salt water in the very 
heart of the site assumed for the ancient 
town. This salt stagnum is the remnant 
of the old harbor which has been silted up; 
and this process of silting must have 
already advanced considerably in Avienus’ 
time some fifteen hundred years ago and 
nearly a thousand years after the founda- 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


IN SPAIN 


tion of the town. If we may take this as 
an indication of the rate of silting, the day 
when Ifach might have been an island (as 
Schulten would have it for Greek times) 
lies vastly further back in prehistoric 
periods. 

Schulten claims the point of Ifach for 
one of the three islands referred to by 
Avienus in the words litus hoc tres insulae 
cinxere late, ®! remarking ‘‘hodie paeninsula 
tum insula.” If I may venture an opinion 
in an alien field, it does not seem to me 
possible that Ifach could have been an 
island within historic times because, 

(1) There is a line of reefs stretching 
along the south bay from the slope of Ifach 
to the left bank of the little stream which 
reaches the sea below Calpe (Pl. II and 
III). Alluvial deposits from this stream 
could fill the south bay and perhaps be car- 
ried through the only gap in the reef into 
the ancient harbor, now the salt pool; but 
they could not have had much effect in 
forming the large bar which borders the 
east bay and connects Ifach to the north 
with the mainland, since this bar is not a 
low flat of alluvial sand but the remnant of 
dunes and probably very old; 


wey eMONOGRAPHS 


119 


O. M. 
461-62 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


(2) There are no streams emptying in or 
near the east bay. ‘The configuration of 
the land in Greek times should therefore 
have been somewhat as shown by the ac- 
companying sketch (Fig. 2). 

STRABO definitely identifies Hemerosko- 
peion with Dianium. Yet he says of it that 
it is well suited for pirates and is visible 
from a great distance to those sailing in its 
direction. This does not fit Denia at all, 
as the castle-hill is not a conspicuous object 
from the sea. It is, however, a perfect 
description of Ifach; for anyone coming 
south down the Spanish coast does not 
catch sight of it until he rounds Cabo de la 
Nao, but anyone coming north up the coast 
(z. e. “‘in its direction”) sees it more than 
fifty miles away and keeps it as his most 
conspicuous landmark. The heights of 
Ifach, unscalable from the land, sheer and 
difficult from the sea, would be ideal for a 
pirate’s stronghold, a natural place for that 
opuntnpiov of Sertorius, which Strabo 
localises at Hemeroskopeion. (In this con- 
nection it is interesting to note that Plu- 
tarch, in his Life of Sertorius, knows noth- 
ing of either Hemeroskopeion or Dianium.) 


BRYN MAWR NOTES. 





"UdlsdOYsoIOWIOH{ JO 9}IG jo uefg [einqooluog ‘7 oInNdIYy 





Sav 
See ee an 
000% )~=—s_- 00S 000} 00S ry 





VI 





THE GREEKS 





But the whole passage in Strabo needs to 
be considered in greater detail: 

After reaching Carthago Nova in his 
description, Strabo takes up the stretch of 
coast from Cartagena to the mouth of the 
Ebro and bisects it, observing that the 
River Sucron (now Jucar) empties at about 
the mid-point of this coast( which is wholly 
correct). Next he describes the southern 
section, saying that between the Jucar and 
Cartagena are three towns of the Massi- 
liotes not very far from the  Tiver—peragd 
pev ovv Tov DovKpwvos Kal TIS Kapxndovos 
Tpia ToNixyia Macoanuord é EOTLW OV TOAD 
amrwhev Tov morayov. In view of the large 
sweep of such a method of narration, we 
can scarcely conclude that the three towns 
were at the very mouth of the Jucar, since 
in that case there would be little force in 
speaking of them as between the Jucar and 
Cartagena, especially as the next point to 
be mentioned is far down the coast below 
Alicante; nor can they be nearly as much 
as midway between these extremes since 
then there would be no force in saying that 
they were near the river. The coasting 
distance from river-mouth to Cartagena is 
about 140 nautical miles, so that the 


BRYN MAWERNCaa 





PN os PA TN 


stretch of coast lying between 20 and 60 
miles from the Jucar would agree with the 
strict letter of the Strabonian passage. 
This gives us precisely the region of the 
Cape from about Denia (25 miles) to Calpe 
(50 miles) with the three ancient sites of 
Denia, Javea, and Ifach to assign as we 
choose. ‘Best known of these is Hemero- 
_|skopeion with a highly venerated shrine of 
the Ephesian Artemis on the height (emi ry 
axpa).”’ It is highly tempting to think of 
the very end of the Cabo de la Nao*’ with 
its sheer cliffs and conspicuous Sunium- 
like situation as the site for this temple; 
but a visit to land’s end convinced me that 
no temple was ever built on this headland. 
At Denia there are at present no traces of 
a temple of Artemis. The immured in- 
scription which guide-books mention as 
coming from the ancient temple of Diana 
bears the words “sacred to Venus” 
(VENERI SACR) and there once was an in- 
scription, now lost, which referred to the 
dedication of a temple or shrine to Jupiter, 
for whom the nearby mountain Mongé 
may possibly be named; but of Artemis or 
Diana no mention is extant, nor have ama- 
teur seekers, or the builders of houses ever 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


123 


“ME 


124 


VI° 


THE GREEKS 


chanced upon the slightest trace of a tem- 
ple-emplacement on the castle hill or below 
it. I emphasize this because it always 
seems to be assumed that Denia derived 
its name from such a sanctuary. But 
Dianium may be a Latinisation of the Iberic 
Diniu rather than vice versa. If any of 
the coins with the legend Diniu in Iberic 
letters can be proved to be pre-Roman, 
this would be established as certain, since 
obviously the name Diniu will not derive 
from the Greek form ’Apvepiovov. At 


Ifach I do not believe that there ever was 


a temple on the great rock, but rather that 
its situation is to be sought either on the 
sloping ground beneath the tower (see the 
final paragraph of this appendix) or on the 
elevation marked “X” on Plate III. 
Strabo’s account confuses in one the two 
noteworthy features of Hemeroskopeion, 
which were the sanctuary of Artemis and 
the great tower of rock. 

Strabo goes on to say, ‘“‘and Sertorius 
used this as his base of operation by sea,” 
@ (sc. Lep@ or T@ ‘Hpepooxoreiw?) Expnoaro 
DepTwpios opunrynpiw Kara Oadarray, “for 
it is strong and sheer and fine for bucca- 
neering, conspicuous from afar to those 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





IN SPAIN 125 


that sail towards it,” epuyvoy yap éore 
kal AnorpiKoy, KaToTTOV 6é EK TOAAOV TOLS 
mpoom\éovor, and this, I am sure, can only 
be Ifach, a glorious stronghold for pirates 
and the most splendid landmark of the 
eastern Spanish coast. 

Thereupon, scambling his sources and 
reviewing rapidly the rest of the coast down 
to Cartagena, Strabo declares, ‘‘and it is 
also called Dianium, that is Artemision, 
with rich iron-mines nearby and the islands 
Planesia and Plumbaria and a landlocked 
sea fifty miles in circumference.’ These 
are easily identified as Isla Plana, Isla 
Grosa, and the Mar Menor; but they are 
miles away from Hemeroskopeion and do 
not help the problem. Still, Plana is at 
least in sight from Ifach, while it is very 
remote indeed from Denia. 

Strabo categorically declares that Hem- 
eroskopeion was also called Dianium, and 
there can be no doubt that the Dianium of 
Roman times is the Denia of to-day where 
Roman inscriptions are still to be seen with 
the epithets ‘“Dianensi” and ‘“‘Dianensium.”’ 
But it is not therefore certain that Dianium 
and Denia are Hemeroskopeion, in spite of 
Strabo’s belief that they were. (It should|ce. strabo 
be remembered that Strabo had never been|!. v. 11 


AND MONOGRAPHS VI 





THE GREEKS 










to Spain.) It is worthy of particular re- 
mark that no Greek objects, no Greek pot- 
sherds, have ever been turned up at Denia 
whereas the soil on the slope of Ifach is full 
of Greek pottery fragments. The infer- 
ence must be that Diniu was an old Iberian 
town whizh the Romans elevated to the 
chief place of the region after the final 
destruction of Hemeroskopeion, which very 
likely took place at Roman hands because 
of Sertorius’ use of it as his stronghold. 
The subsequent confusion of Hemerosko- 
peion with Dianium would then be exactly 
comparable to that of Tartessos with 
Gades, and Mainake with Malaga. 

The United States Navy Hydrographic 
charts, corrected to 1911, but based on 
Spanish maps, have a strange notation of 
“Ruins” and “Pillar” on the rising ground 
of the neck of land just beneath the great 
west cliffs of Ifach. The inference is clear 
that the maps ultimately hark back to a 
time when a Greek or Roman column was 
still standing and there were other traces 
of buildings. Excavation can soon decide 
what once was here. I submit, however, 
that there is already evidence enough to 
make us identify Ifach with Hemero- 
skopeion. 






























BRYN MAWR NOTES 





Paar ab A LN 





II. THE ORIGIN OF IBERIAN VASE 
DESIGNS 


An excellent propaedeutic to the problem 
is an examination of the Elamite ware in 
the de Morgan Room of the Louvre from/jso Pottier 
the site of pre-Persian Susa (fourth to third |J. Sav. 1918 
millenia B.c.), pre-dynastic Egyptian ware 
‘(from much the same period) and Coptic 
ware in the Cairo Museum (from the Chris- 
tian centuries before the Arab conquest). 
All these show certain fundamental simi- 
larities to Iberian ware, which are impor- 
tant to establish because of the obvious 
certainty that there is no possible contact 
or connection. They are documents, there- 
fore, to indicate that Iberian design moves 
at a familiar stage of artistic evolution 
which can be reached by a native art with- 
out outside influence. Upon this is grafted 
the Hellenic or Hellenistic strain, easily 
detected as belonging to a vastly more| 
developed phase than the Iberian, which 
has to break it down in order to assimilate 
it. The “‘Mycenean echoes” in Iberian 
are simply parallels such as have just been 
adduced and prove nothing for any actual 





AND MONOGRAPHS 


128 


Zur Frage 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


contact or surviving tradition. The more 
systematic records of modern excavation 
have long since driven the Myceneanists 
from the field. 

To-day there is apparently no doubt 
about the general chronology of Iberian 
ceramics. Bosch and others have pointed 
out that the concomitants in finds of Iberian 
pottery are always Roman or late Greek, 
except that in the Elche region the acces- 
sories permit a date as early as the fifth 
century B.c. Here, at such a date, there 
are only two possible outside sources of 
influence, the Greek and the Punic. Which 
shall we admit, and how important shall 
we allow the influence to be? 

Unfortunately we have a very incomplete 
acquaintance with Punic products, so that 
it is still theoretically possible to do as L. 
Siret did in an article in l) Anthropologie 
for 1907 and argue that the inspiration for 
the designs on Elche ware came from Car- 
thage, while admitting that Carthage’s 
own inspiration for her vase designs came 
from the Greeks. The question then be- 
comes whether the Iberian designs are 
Greek at first hand or at second; and this 
may seem hard to decide, because the 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





in SPAIN 









Punic side of the case is largely an argu- 
-|mentum ab ignotiore. 

The late date of production of most 
Iberian vases brings them in the time when 
the Punic hold upon Spain was stronger 
than the Greek. However, this proves 
nothing, and in favor of direct Greek in- 
spiration it may be argued that: 

(1) Greek vases were well known to the 
Iberians, since they are very generally 
found together with Iberian vases (even in 
the regions of Punic influence, as at Villa- 
ricos) ; 

(2) The districts of the most undoubted 
Punic influence in the coastland of Anda- 
lusia and Granada seem to be among the 
poorest in producing painted vases, while 
Elche and the rest of Murcia where the art 
was most advanced were regions of indubit- 
able contact with Greece, as this book has 
consistently shown (Cf. Bosch’s map in 
Memnon, 1913, Pl. VII); 

(3) Though the parallels with Greek 
vase designs are often inadequate, we have 
no reason for thinking that it would be 
possible to find such direct or such striking 
parallels in Punic art, since that art, as 
far as we know it to-day, was exceedingly 





























AND MONOGQGRAPHS 





130 


Plate XVII 
het2oos 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


deficient in pictorial representations; and 

(4) It is not likely that the Elche paint-| . 
ers with their patent interest in animal 
and plant designs would draw from the 
meagre Punic store when the wealth of 
Greek material was available to their use. 

Here it might be urged per contra that: 

(1) Iberian design agrees with Punic in 
minimising the very subject of greatest 
interest to Greek designers, the human 
figure in action. If the Iberian painters 
were using Greek prototypes, they could 
hardly have failed to try to imitate the 
human subjects there depicted; and 

(2) The commonest Greek ornament, 
the palmette, hardly ever occurs in Iberian 
designs. 

Yet observe that palmettes do occur, 
that they are always atrociously drawn or 
greatly broken down, that a crude substi- 
tute for the palmette almost invariably 
appears among the Iberian volutes at pre- 
cisely the place where a palmette must 
have occurred in the Greek prototype, and 
that the true native Iberian decorative 
forms are all based on spirals and arcs. 

Perhaps we may reply, then, that: 

(1) Iberian craftsmen for the most part} 
found the human figure too difficult and 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


INUSPAIN 





therefore could not profit by Greek prece- 
dent here; and 

(2) Iberian taste rejected the palmette 
because it disliked its careful symmetry, 
its difficult orderliness, and its lack of flow. 
We may note incidentally that the preva- 
lence of rinceau patterns in Iberian designs 
jis a strong indication of a late (7. e. Hell- 
enistic) date, after the palmette has begun 
to lose its popularity even in Greece. (The 
ivy-leaf on Iberian ware may come almost 
equally well from the later Hellenistic or 
from very early Ionian ware like the Ionian 
hydriae from Caere now in the Louvre, 
E 697-99). 

The parallels which I have adduced on 
Plates XIV to XVII seem direct proof of 
Greek influence on Iberian work. They 
do not exclude the possibility that there 
was also Punic influence; but it is hard to 
see in what such influence might consist. 
Some of the parallels which have been 
drawn with vase-decorations from Car- 
thage are inadequate, while others might 
equally well be claimed for Iberian exports 
or evidence of Iberian influence on Punic 
ware. The ordinary run of Punic pottery 
found at Carthage bears no testimony to a 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





131 


VI 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


flourishing industry of vase-painting which 
could serve as a pattern to anyone. In 
short, the case for a Punic derivation of 
Iberian art is hopeless, and in general we 
may say of pre-Roman Iberian art that 
what is not Greek in it is due to native 
bent and power, and that what is not 
native is Greek. 

But the difficulty remains that the Greek 
parallels are either early or late, while the 
entire century from about 525 to 425 B.c. 
seems to have left no mark on Spanish 
design, in spite of the fact that it was one 
of the most flourishing and important 
epochs of Greek ceramic art. We cannot 
argue that the chief workshops of this -par- 
ticular century were Attic and that Athens 
sent no ships to Spain; because it is pretty 
clear that, by one carrier or another, Attic 
pots went everywhere. (G. M.A. Richter, 
in Annual Brit. School Athens, XI. 224— 
“The area over which these Attic vases 
were distributed comprises almost the whole 
of the world as known at that time.”) The 
jumping hare on Plate XIV was certainly 
inspired very directly, almost plagiaristic- 
ally, from some black-figure pot such as 
could hardly have come into Iberian hands 





BRYN MAWR NOTES 





EN SPAIN 





after the sixth century B.c.; while the 
style of the tendrils on Plate XV did not 
exist before the last of the fifth century, 
but is abundantly in evidence on South 
Italian ware of the fourth. And even if 
we plead that Attic ware was technically 
too difficult in its draughtsmanship to be 
imitated by the Iberian potters, yet we 
should expect some echo of it, however 
dampened, and in excavating Iberian sites 
we should find importations of these fifth 
century products; but, as far as I can dis- 
cover, such has not been the case. 

The most reasonable inference must be 
that there was a suspension of Greek trade 
in Murcia toward the later sixth century 
at the time that Tartessos and Mainake 
were destroyed and at the very time when, 
as the Ampurias finds indicate, Emporion 
was beginning to flourish. In that case 
the Lady of Elche causes difficulty (if the 
dating around 460-450 B.c. be accepted), 
unless she be claimed as the precursor ot 
the returning Greek influence. ‘That Mas- 
silia did reassert the Phocaean hold on the 
East Coast is indicated by the establish- 
ment of Alonae, which does not exist in 
Avienus and therefore is a later settlement 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


than Hemeroskopeion. We may perhaps 
draw a parallel between Murcia and Sicily 
as areas of Greco-Punic strife. As Car- 
thaginian power weakened in Spain, it re- 
treated, leaving the Greeks free commercial 
access as far as Massia—which is seemingly 
how the agreement stands in Polybius’ 
Second Treaty, dating presumably from 
the middle of the fourth century B.c. So 
that it seems fair to assert that the Greek 
influence in the Elche region must have 
been strong in the fourth century and that 
this is the chief formative period of the 
Elche School. This school in turn was the 
source of most of the developed Iberian 
pottery designs. 

Accordingly, the solution which I have 
proposed in this book tries to reconcile the 
various difficulties by postulating a break 
of contact with Greek art during the latter 
sixth century B.C., a surviving tradition of 
the earlier Ionic vegetabiliar and beast art 
lingering among the native potters of the 
‘““Greek”’ coast, and a powerful recrudes- 
cence of Greek influence in the decadent 
days of Greek vase-painting when tendril 
and rinceau ornaments ran wild and domi- 
nated the restrained balance of earlier 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 








Pie PAN 





Greek designs. These traditions survived 
in the industry of the Iberian potters 
through the period of greatest Cartha- 
ginian power in the later third century and 
lasted into Roman times, moving inland 
and northward from Murcia into Catalonia 
and the Numantian highland. 

The evidence from the Cerro de los San- 
tos sculptures must also be taken into 
account. There is the same indication of 
late sixth century influence,** followed by a 
break of contact—a contact which here, 
however, is not re-established until Roman 
times. The ‘“‘Red Ridinghood” period 
must fall during a time of isolation after 
the Greek contact, and therefore most 
probably in the Hellenistic Age. 

The appalling Isis and Osiris sculptures 
(so generally dismissed as forgeries) may 
belong to the early Roman period. In that 
case they suggest that the Iberian School 
-|had not prospered well when left so wholly 
to its own resources. (Compare the stag- 
nation and atrophy at Santa Elena and 
San Esteban.) 

Taking the evidence of pottery, sculp- 
ture, and architecture together, one is led 
to assert that the first Greek Period (sixth 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


135 


Paris, 

Essat 

I, Figs 120- 
22, 134 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


century B.C.) penetrated inland—though 
we do not know how long it took to do so— 
while the second Greek period (450-250 
B.C.) as far as monumental art was con- 
cerned, touched only the seaboard, and as 
far as pottery was concerned, exercised an 
influence which spread slowly into the 
interior of the land. The Roman domina- 
tion was apparently not hostile to the 
Greco-Iberian and native Iberian artistic 
traditions, but naturally modified and at 
last supplanted them. 


III. A VAse-FRAGMENT FROM EMPORION 


The vase-fragment on Plate XXI was 
discovered in the course of excavations on 
the site of the old Massilian town of Em- 
porion and is at present exhibited in the 
Barcelona Museum. It is obviously a 
piece of red-figured Attic ware of the severe 
style from the hand of one of the masters. 
It can be shown beyond doubt that this 
master was Makron. 

The fragment, which comes from a kylix, 
shows a komos of three girls. The first, 
seated on the left, is playing a lyre. She 
faces a central figure who stands with a} 
pair of flutes in her left hand, with her right 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





IN SPAIN 


hand raised in the gesture commonly used 
for a flower or taenia, though here the ob- 
ject itself is invisible. This second girl 
stands back to back with a third on the 
right of the fragment, who must have orig- 
inally paired with a lost fourth figure to- 
ward whom she is slowly moving. The 
three apparently are dressed in sleeved 
chiton with himation thrown over the left 
shoulder. The drawing of these garments, 
as indeed of the fragment throughout, is 
very fine, being done with extraordinary 
delicacy and sureness in clear firm lines of 
luminous black. 
A kylix in the Metropolitan Museum in 
New York is closely related to this Ampu- 
rias fragment. [Illustrations of this kylix 
may be found in the American Journal of 
Archaeology for 1917 (Plates 1-3) and in 
volume II of J. C. Hoppin’s Handbook of 
Attic Red-figured Vases (Harvard University 
Press, 1919). The interior (AJA, 1917, 
Plate 1; Hoppin, II, p. 68) shows a man 
standing before a seated woman. ‘To the 
latter I would draw particular attention, 
because so many of the details of draughts- 
manship agree exactly with the flute girl 
on the Ampurias fragment. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





138 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


Both have the same puff of hair on the 
forehead, the same small delicately scrolled 
ear, the same carriage of the head on tilted 
neck. Lower, a great number of parallel 
vertical and nearly straight lines indicates 
the chiton, through which both breasts are 
visible, the left one slightly misplaced in 
drawing. The method of indicating the 
right hand, with its waving interior-line 
corresponds closely; and the right fore- 
arms, bent at the elbow, are nearly iden- 
tical. 

On the exterior of the Metropolitan kylix 
(AJA, 1917, Plates 2 and 3; Hoppin, II, 
69) the face of the maiden IIEAEA resem- 
bles that of the lyre player on the Ampurias 
fragment in its pointed nose, pendant lower 
lip, and round, rather heavy chin. The 
maiden NAYKAKEA is reminiscent of the 
flute player in various details, notably in the 
hanging sleeve of the chiton and the rounded 
curve of the edge of the himation beside it. 

The Metropolitan kylix has for signa- 
ture HIEPON ENOIEZEN incised on the 
handle, and is almost universally accepted 
as the work of the painter Makron. 

The next best parallel to the Ampurias 
fragment is to be found in the Louvre 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 








iy Se PAT N 









(G 143; illustrated in Hoppin, II, pp. 74- 
75). It is a kylix, with the same incised 
signature of Hieron on the handle. Here 
will be found parallels for many of the 
details of dress, particularly the wavelike 
panel folds on the himation fronts and the 
heavily looped chiton sleeves at the elbows. 

It was of this painter Makron that Beaz- 
ley wrote, with his usual pointed brevity, 
“‘His men and youths are less interesting 
than hiswomen. Indeed, the signal beauty 
of his drawing resides in his women’s 
clothes.” (J. D. Beazley, Attic Red-figured 
Vases in American Museums, Harvard 
University Press, 1918, p. 102.) 

Nothing could better illustrate this “‘sig- 
nal beauty of drawing” than our disre- 
garded and almost unknown fragment from 
Ampurias. It ranks with the best among 
all that is listed in Hoppin’s or Beazley’s 
authoritative collections of the work of 
Makron. And when it is further observed 
that its nearest relative, the Metropolitan 
kylix (which in my opinion it excels in 
beauty) is singled out by Beazley as ‘‘the 
best of his many cups with simple conver- 
sation scenes,” it should be clear that this 
little find from Emporion with its marvel- 


























AND MONOGRAPHS 


140 


VI 





THE GREEKS 


lous accuracy, its freshness and delicacy 
and charm, must take its place among the 
best surviving works of one of the great 
masters of the hey-day of Attic vase- 
painting. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


Ta SP A IN 


COMMENTARY 


. Cf. Avienus, Ora Maritima, 127-29: 
obire semper huc et huc ponti feras, 
navigia lenta et languide repentia 
internatare beluas. 

and vv. 410-11: 
vis beluarum pelagus omne internatat 
multusque terror ex feris habitat freta. 

. G. G. King, The Way of St, James, Book 

ITI, ch. vi. 

. The best evidence for this is Avienus, 113: 
Tartessiisque in terminos Oestrumnidum 
negotiandi mos erat, 

on which Schulten remarks in his edition 

of Avienus (p. 81, ad loc.) “‘Hic versus, 

qui summi momenti est, testatur Tar- 
tessios in Oestrymnin navigasse, scilicet 
stanni causa. ... Videntur igitur primi 

Tartessii oceanum temptasse, non Phoe- 

nices et multo minus Carthaginienses, 

qui post Tartessum demum deletam 
oceanum adire poterant.”’ 

. On the -ussa endings cf. Schulten, Avie- 

nus, ad v. 148 and his Tariessos, p. 28. 

. Bosch, Ensayo Etnologia, p. 88 n. 

. Avienus, 150; Hdt. I. 166; Scymn. 168, 

196; Pliny III. 75, and the note to Avien. 

150, on p. 84 of Schulten’s edition, whence 

these references are borrowed. 

. Schulten’s Avienus, p. 84 ad. v. 148. 

. The antiquities of Ibiza have been ex- 

tremely well classified and published by 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





142 


VI 


10. 


THE GREE Rs 


A. Vives, Estudio de Arqueologta Carta- 
ginesa: la Necrépolt de Ibiza, a work 
which may be accepted as authoritative. 
In using the material one must be careful 
not to mistake crudity for antiquity in 
provincial Punic. For my position on 
the late date of Punic colonisation of the 
island: ‘‘en cuanto a Ibiza, falta por 
completo lo que se refiere a vasos impor- 
tados anteriores a los italogriegos”’ (1.e. 
before 600 B.c.) (Vives, p. xxix). Pro- 
tocorinthian vases are spoken of as ‘“‘fal- 
tando completamente en Ibiza”’ (p. 113) 
yet ‘‘se encuentran con relativa abun- 
dancia en las necrépolis de la primera 
época de Cartago’’ and there ‘‘se fechan 
entre los siglos viii al vi.’” There are no 
funerary stelae or sepulchral epigraphs in 
Punic writing on the island (p. xix). The 
archaic material is as often Greek as 
Punic in origin, and proves only cabotage. 
For Sardinia cf. Patroni, Nora, in Mon.| 
Ant. Linc., XIV (1904), and the article 
s.v. in Pauly-Wissowa. 


. There is a good article on Carthago Nova 


in Pauly-Wissowa. 

It is possible that Abdera near the modern 
Almeria was also a Phocaean settlement, 
though I am not confident that there is 
evidence to prove this as ‘‘impérieuse- 
ment’’ as Reinach insists (Rev. Et. Gr., 
1898, pp. 54-55). For Schulten’s identifi- 
cation of the site of Mainake, see Arch. 
Anz., 1922, pp. 30-37, with the sketch- 
map there. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


11. 


12. 


| 13. 


14. 


15. 


Leto A IN 


Because it is mentioned in Avienus, whose 
original cannot antedate 530 B.c. (See 
Schulten’s introduction to his edition.) 
A. Schulten, Tartessos, Hamburg, 1922. 
Do not fail to consult also Arch. Anz., 
1922, pp. 18 ff, and 1923-24, pp. 1-10, 
with the sketch-map, indicating that Tar- 
tessos lies buried under river-sand.. 
Isaiah 2. 16; I Kings 22. 48; 10. 22; Ezek. 
27. 12; Jerem. 10. 9. See Schulten’s 
Avienus, pp. 127-29, and his Tartessos. 
Strabo’s tradition must refer to the Car- 
thaginian destruction of Tartessos about 
500 B.c. and to the Punic aggression upon 
the south coast at this time. To refer it 
back to true Phoenician days (as Schulten 
does) and to assume an earlier conquest 
of Tartessos is a gratuitous complication, 
in itself highly improbable. Phoenicians 
and Carthaginians are not clearly kept 
apart in ancient record. It seems to me 
possible that the original of Avienus did 
try to distinguish the two, calling the 
Carthaginians Libyphoenices; but Schul- 
ten (Avienus, p. 29) -declares, ‘‘ Hic inter 
Libyphoenices et Phoenices discrimen 
nullum nisi nomine fuisse videtur.” It 


is hardly possible that Strabo should 


make a distinction that was already 
blurred in the time of the Massiliot sail- 
ing-book. 

Schulten explains the presence of the Pho- 
caeans in the Tagus mouth by making 
them portage thence overland to Mainake 
by a land road, after they had been shut 





AND MONOGRAPHS 


143 


VI 


144 


VI 


16. 
Wie 


18. 


19; 


20. 


THE GREEKS 


out from the city of Tartessos by the Car- 
thaginians. This may of course have 
been the case; but in general I should 
hesitate to take the Phocaeans far from 
the sea and their ships, and should prefer 
to leave portages and pack-trains to the 
indigenes. 

Schulten’s Avienus, p. 11. 

This is Schulten’s inference from Avienus, 
178-82. ’ 

For example, Babelon, Cat. Bronzes Bib. 
Nat., Nos. 206, 265, 266; Athens, Nat. 
Mus., 7541 (de Ridder, Cat. Bronzes Soc. 
Arch. Pl. III, 880) for the raised right 
hand; de Ridder, Cat. Bronzes Acrop. Ath., 
p. 299, Fig. 287, for the costume; - Richter, 
Metropolitan Mus. Bronzes, No. 56, for an 
Etruscan version of a similar theme. 
For the general style of figurine see the 
bronze statuette in Arch. Anz., 1922, p. 
65, No. 7, and its connection with the 
Ionic Greek as discussed in the text there- 


to. 

Jullian, Histoire de la Gaule, I, p. 205; 
Busolt, Gr. Gesch., I, p. 433. There seems 
nowadays to be fairly general agreement 
on the correctness of this date. 

To me at least it seems certain that Calli- 
polis and Tarragona are one and the same. | 
The Roman Avienus, unaware of their 
identity, put in Tarragona and Barcelona 
from his own knowledge without ventur- 
ing to say anything further about Tarra- 
gona—which would imply an amazing 
omission on the part of the Massiliot 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


74 © 


IN SPAIN 


sailing-book had this not just described 
Tarragona under the name Callipolis. 
The great walls, the fishy marsh on either 
side, the mention immediately after 
Salauris (which must lie on Cape Salou) 
fit Tarragona perfectly and seem to mea 
conclusive indication. It is embarrassing 
to differ herein from the brilliant editor 
of Avienus. Bosch, however, shares my 
opinion. 

Insederant in Avien., 464, is a pluperfect 
and ought therefore to reflect a past tense 
in the Massiliot original, in whose day 
consequently the Iberians have already 
dispossessed the Gymnetes. These have 
moved over to Ibiza, though the tradi- 
tion of their previous sojourn on the op- 
posing mainland still lives on in the ‘“‘old 
name’”’ of the land ‘‘as far as the Sicanus 
basin ’’— 


‘“‘post haec per undas insula est Gymnesia 
populoincolarum quae vetus nomen dedit 
Sicani ad usque praefluentis alveum.”’ 

(Ora Marit., 467-69.) 


Schulten is not justified in transposing 
this last line elsewhere, since it does very 
well where he found it. If one overlooks 
the tense of znsederant and the force of 
vetus nomen, one is bound to accuse Avi- 
enus of direct self-contradiction and to 
write as Schulten does, ‘‘Contra scilicet 
insulam Ebusum sedebant Hiberi.... 
Incipere videntur Hiberi a flumine Si- 
cano,”’ although both of these statements 
cannot simultaneously be true. As I read 









AND MONOGRAPHS 


146 THE GREEKS 





Avienus, the kingdom of Tartessos ends 
near Alicante with the ancient Herna 
civitas (7. e. not merely a town, but a dis- 
trict or region). Coterminous with this 
is the first Iberian civitas Ilerda, covering 
the tract of sandy beaches from the Cabo 
de las Huertas to the rocky shores of the 
Cabo de la Nao. After the cape-land 
comes the Sicana civitas, propinquo ab 
amnt sic vocata: thereafter, not far (neque 
longe) from this river’s mouth is Tyris, 
near or at the present city of Valencia. 
Lest I seem to be stretching unduly the 
propinquity in propinquo ab amnti, it is to 
be noted that neque longe actually repre- 
sents more than 20 miles: “near” and 
‘‘far’’ are relative to the scale on which 
one is working. See also Note 51. 

22. For the ethnography of early Spain and 
the clear differentiation of the Tartesso- 
Iberian coastal civilisation from the Celtic 
type of the elevated interior, there are no 
better sources of information than Bosch, 
whose work in this field is of the highest 
order. See particularly his Ensayo de una 
Reconstruccion, etc. Apparently the Car- 
thaginian encroachment and pressure 
from the south occasioned a gradual Tar- 
tesso-Iberian penetration of the interior, 
so that the Celtic civilisation became 
Iberianised and finally became the last 
stronghold of Iberianism after the coast 
had succumbed to Punic and Roman ag- 
gression. Celts and Iberians are of course 
neither of them autochthonous, but in- 


VI BRYN MAWR NOTES 





PN oP A DN 





vaded Spain, the one certainly from the 
north and in historic times, the other prob- 
ably from the south and at’a much earlier 
period. The earlier people whom these 
dispossessed are to be found as remnants 
in the mountainous and wilder parts of 
the land. Of these, the Basques may be 
a sole living survivor in our times. 

23. Siret, Villaricos y Herrerias,Madrid, 1909, 
pp. 436 ff.—‘‘Sean Tirios o Cartagineses 
los mercaderes de cuentecitas de pasta 
esmaltada. . . . la influencia fenicia se 
reducia a la introduccion de unos cuantos 
articulos de comercio insignificantes. . . . 
Esto era en el siglo vii en la costa SE de 
Espafia, enfrente y cerca del Africa y en 
el mas importante de los distritos argen- 
tiferos de la Peninsula, uno de los mas 
codiciados por los Fenicios y de ellos cono- 
cido anteriormente. .... Durante el 
apogeo de la fortuna de Tiro, el Sud de 
Espafia era puramente celtiberico (or 
rather Massian-Tartessian, as the Celtic 
invasion did not take place until about 
500 B.c. and properly affected the North 
of the peninsula only) sin rastro alguno 
de influencia ni dominacion fenicias. <A 
la misma conclusion lleva el estudio de la 
edad del bronce. . . . (Therefore, thinks 
Siret) las tradiciones relativas a la domi- 
nacion fenicia, de cuya realidad no es 
permetido dudar, se refieren a los tiempos 
anteriores a la edad del bronce y a la fun- 
dacion de Gadir.’”’ (This is to draw quite 
the wrong conclusion from the evidence. 





‘AND MONOGRAPHS 





THE GREEKS 


It is better to recognise the ‘‘ mirage phéni- 
cien”’ for what it is, than to pursue it 
emptily into the desert of prehistory.) 

. Good reproductions of the Lady of Elche 
and necessary information are most con- 
veniently found in the Monuments Piot, 
Vol. IV, 1897; P. Paris, Essaz I, pp. 279- 
300. Pls. I, XII; P. Paris, Prom. Arch., 
I, pp. 79-88, Pl. XVIII. 

. Since the argument is scarcely in place 
I must content myself with recording the 
opinion that the ‘‘Bluebird’’ priestess 
sarcophagus relief in the Carthage Mu- 
seum and at least one of her fellows were 
the work of Sicilian Greeks employed in 
Carthage, just as the Carthaginian coins 
were so often the work of Sicilian die- 
cutters. If one asks why the Lady of 
Elche cannot be classed with the “ Blue- 
bird”’ lady and both claimed as Punic art, 
the reply is that Carthage did not accept 
the Greek style until the end of the fifth 
or beginning of the fourth century, and 
the Lady of Elche is based on an earlier 
phase of Greek art. What happened in 
Carthage then had already happened in 
south-eastern Spain nearly a century 
earlier. In architecture, the Sicilian Doric 
order of the Numidian Médracen may be 
taken as a reflection of the Punic style of 
the fourth century B.c. 

. P. Paris, Essat, I, pp. 162-258; Prom. 
Arch., I, pp. 45-71. 

; Ske Essai, I. Pl. VII; Prom. Arch., I, 
Pls. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





IN SPAIN 


28. The rayed sun-face and the crescent moon 
occur as symbols on several of the Punic 
stelae in Room I of the Musée Alaoui 
(Bardo), Tunis. The crescent moon with 
profile face recurs on the Iberian coins of 
Saetabis (as Paris points out, Essai, II, 
p. 292, n. 3) while the rayed full face is 
used on the coins of Emporion or Rhode 
(J. has Les Monedes Catalanes, p. xl., 
Ag fe 

. A good and very interesting parallel in 
Copenhagen (Glyptotek Ny Carlsberg, 
No. 554 a; illustrated Oest. Jhf., XIX, 
1919, p. 217, Fig. 144) shows a cuirass 
with hippocamps with looped tails and 
dolphin-forks, and over these a full-face 
Medusa with snakes knotted under her 
chin; there are tendril-arabesques below 
the sea-beasts. A sea-dragon occurs on 
the cuirassed statue in the National Mu- 
seum in Athens (No. 1644). For a poor 
parallel on Spanish soil, cf. the statue in 
Seville in Arndt-Amelung Eznzelaufnah- 
men, No. 1821. 

. A Triton with looped tail and dolphin-fork 
occurs as a decorative element on the 

. carved marble mantle from Lykosura in 
the group by Damophon (Nat. Mus. 
Athens). The Hippocamp is of course as 
old as Greek art; but the form of it on 
the Iberian panel seems derived from the 
Hellenistic type of sea-monster, which 
continued in favor into Imperial Roman 
times. (A more accurate stylistic identi- 
fication might be useful). The natural- 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





150 


VI 


31. 


a2: 
33. 


THE GREEKS 


istic ram, whatever he may mean and in 
spite of his resemblance to the Order of 
the Golden Fleece, also looks as though 
he had been borrowed from the Roman 
repertory. 

A poor sketch in Paris, Essai, I, p. 259, 
Fig. 295. On the original stone the navel 
shows clearly, as is usual on Roman cors- 
let statues; and the straps and fringes 
(at the left of the illustration) are clearly 
distinguishable from the grooved folds of 
the corslet(centre right). It is this three- 
corded fringe terminatirig a strap in 
Roman fashion to which Paris is referring 
in Essai, I, p. 304, where he says, ‘‘a 
droite on voit encore sur l’étoffe une sorte 
d’applique en forme de trident, dont je 
ne reconnais pas l’usage."’ For the hang- 
ing strap with fringe cf. the corsleted torso 
in Pola illustrated Oest. Jhf., XIX, 1919, 
p. 241, Fig. 169, and for this whole sub- 
ject of corslet-statues, Hekler’s Beztraege 
zur Geschichte der antiken Panzer-statuen, 
tbid., pp. 190-241. The corsleted frag- 
ment from Elche now in the Louvre 
(Essai, I, p. 303, Fig. 307) also seems to 
have been borrowed from Roman Impe- 
rial styles; but this is less demonstrable. 
Bosch, Prehist. Cat., p. 215; J. Botet, Les 
Monedes Catalanes, pp. xlix—lxxi. 

Bosch, Prehist. Cat., p. 279, ‘‘La civilit- 
zacié6 iberica de l’interior sembla que 
subsisteix en els primers temps de 1’ ocu- 
pacié romana,” as is proved by the occur- 
rence together of Iberian pottery with 





BRYN MAWR NOTES 


uN; 5 PAIN 





34. 
35. 


36. 
_ purias which seems to contradict this 


Sh. 


Roman terra sigillata in a dozen places in 


the Urgell region and at Serra Mitjana 


in the province of Tarragona. Cf. Bosch, 
Zur Frage, etc. 

Bosch in Annuari del Institut d’Estudis 
Catalans, V (1913-14), pp. 856 ff. 

See Bibliography. 

There is an Iberian fragment from Am- 


statement. The Cazurro vase (Annuart, 
POs ook: bull, H1sp., 1911, Pl. I; 
Arch. Anz., 1912, p. 437, Fig. 33; Rev. 
Arch., 1917, 1, p. 113; Paris, Prom. Arch., 
II. Pl. XX XIII) shows an animated hunt- 
ing scene with brilliant and vigorous ac- 
tion of human figures. The prototype of 
this is not Attic, however, but clearly and 
easily to be detected in such a parallel as 
the Caeretan hydria with Herakles’ Busi- 
ris adventure (Furt.-Reich., Pl. 51, and 
the illustrations in the corresponding 


text). The five negroes here echo the] 


loincloth costume and the spacing of 
figures on the Cazurro vase, as the little 
hunting scene on the band below echoes 
the similarly animated one on the Cazurro 
vase. It is highly interesting that Furt- 
waengler (text to Pl. 51, on p. 257) pos- 
tulated Phocaean artists for the Caeretan 
hydriae, as did Duemmler, R. M. 1888, 179. 
Iberian kylices, based on Greek proto- 
types, have been found at Tarragona, in 
Aragon (La Gessera), Catalonia, and else- 
where. When datable, they nearly always 
belong in the third century B.c. (Bosch, 
Prehist. Cat., pp. 256, 274, and 278). 





AND MONOGRAPHS 


151 


VI 


152 


VI 


38. 


39; 


40. 


THE GREEKS 


For the buried dart cf. Milet, III, p. 154, 
Fig. 42 (an archaic basis of old but un- 
certain date); Sardis, I, p. 77, Fig. 74; 
the capital in the British Museum from 
the old Artemis temple at Ephesos; also, 
the overturned leaves of the Delphi capi- 
tals (A.J.A., 1923, pp. 165-67) probably 
from the treasury of Massilia; and the 
early-Ionic ovolos of Persepolis. For the 
corner volute of the Louvre fragment cf. 
Milet, III, p. 151, Fig. 38 (where the cor- 
ner of the ovolo is formed by a palmette 
with a similar volute at the top) and the 
Didymaion anta-cap (Noack, Baukunst 
des Altertums, Pl. 44a). For the widely 
overhanging profile of the Madrid frag- 
ment cf. the Cadacchio moulding in Corfu 
(Perrot and Chipiez, VII, Fig. 248) which 
probably dates from the sixth century B.c. 
There is an interesting Iberian column 
base in the Madrid Archaeological Mu- 
seum—a square plinth surmounted by a 
shallow scotia and a torus much like an 
inverted Tuscan-Doric capital. I do not 
know any parallel for this; but it is per- 
haps worth noticing that bases which re- 
semble inverted archaic Doric capitals 
occur also in Etruria (e. g. the Orvieto 
base, Martha, L’Art Etrusque, Fig. 131). 
The profile certainly forces us to assume 
Greek influence, but of what date or 
locality I cannot say. 

The excavation of Emporion has been car- 
ried on by the Barcelona Museum, and in 
that Museum most of the finds are to be 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


PNS SPAIN 


seen. But there is also a little local mu- 
seum at San Martin; some objects found 
at Ampurias in earlier days are now in 
the museums at Gerona and at Vich; and 
there are also a few things in private pos- 
session. The site of Emporion may be 
visited without particular difficulty, and 
constitutes a repaying excursion. 

. For such a plan see Annuari, VI (1915- 
20), and the individual house plans such 
as Fig. 533 in that volume. (Cf. also 
Bonner Jahrbiicher, 1909, and Rev. Arch., 
1916, II, p. 342.) 

. Annuart, II, 1908, pp. 195-240, Fricken- 
haus, Griechische Vasen aus Emporion, 

. We may readily see what this pose be- 
comes under Praxitelean influence by 
consulting the Asklepios in the Athens 
National Museum (No. 266, illustrated 
Ath. Mitth., XVII, 1892, Pl. II). The 
connection of this with the earlier Am- 
purias type is apparent in the drapery, 
since the same catenaries loop over the 
right leg and very much the same mass of 
drapery hangs from the left arm-pit. 
There are in the same museum a number 
of other Asklepios statuettes from the 
Hieron of Epidauros which show that this 
Polykleitanised pose had supplanted the 
earlier one throughout Hellenistic and 
Roman times, and this alone makes it 
highly unlikely that the out-of-mode 
Pheidian pose would ever have been resus- 
citated for a cult statue in these later 
times. A close parallel to the Ampurias 


AND MONOGRAPHS 








153 


VI 


154 


VI 


44, 
45. 


46. 


47. 


48, 


THE GREEKS 


Asklepios occurs on the “‘Bendis”’ decree 
heading (Arndt, Ny Carlsberg, Pl. 88) 
from the Piraeus, in which the “ Askle- 
pios’’ has a Parthenon-frieze type of head 
(the whole figure might almost have 
stepped out of the east frieze); but the 
drapery is more fluent, the style easier, 
and the pose Polykleitanised, so that it is 
clearly a later version of the same tradi- 
tional type. The archon’s name in the 
inscription dates this relief 329-328 B.c. 
Athens, National Museum, Nos. 208-13; 
illustrated Brunn-Bruckmann, Pl. 464. 
British Museum, Sculptures of the Par- 
thenon, Pl. 30, No. 1. Cf. also Nos. 49 
and 52 on Pl. 38. 

B.M., Sc. of the Parth.: west 23 (Pl. 69); 
north 112 and 121 (Pls. 56%and Ss) for 
a yet sketchier manner. Conze, Att. 
Grabreliefs: No. 1210 (Pl. 267) for the 
unlinear pebbled texture; No. 1264 (PI. 
272) for the roughly picked style. Cf. 
Brunn-Bruckmann, Pl. 464, lower right. 
Nothing could be more impressionistic 
than the hair of the Parthenon-frieze head 
(Téte Coulouche) acquired by the Louvre 
in 1916. 

Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 362. For the 
treatment of the back hair of the Askle- 
pios cf. the elder leaning on his staff on 
the Parthenon east frieze (No. 46). 

For cheeks, eyes, and forehead, cf. the 
very battered head of the elder crowning 
himself on the Parthenon north frieze 
(B.M. Sc. Parth., No. 38). The Boston 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


49, 


50. 


SL. 


IN SPAIN 


Zeus head, Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 572. 
A somewhat later version of the Ampurias 
type has turned up in the Moscow His- 
torical Museum (J.H.S., 1924, Pl. I). 
This head has the same claim to being an 
original marble as the Ampurias Askle- 


pios. Olbia and Emporion both evidently 


imported these cult-statues from Greece. 
A comparison of the two heads is an inter- 
esting comment on the stylistic changes 
in the ateliers during an interval of some 
50 years. 

I have been unable to control the state- 
ment in Annuart, IV, p. 308, ‘‘en el sol 
sobre que s’aixeca. 1 podium d’aqueix 
edicul, s’hi trobarea fragments de cera- 
mica grega del segle iv.’’ Cf. Paris in 
Rev. Arch., 1916, II, p. 348, for a different 
version which would prove the podium 
at least as old as the fourth century B.c. 
See Bibliography, and especially J. Botet. 
I have not mentioned in the text the 
Greek town of Rhode which lay opposite 
Emporion on the north shore of the same 
deep bay (which owes its modern name 
of Golfo de Rosas to the tradition of this 
town). There is no connection between 
Rhode and the Rhodians, since the town 
is clearly an off-shoot of Emporion. 
The coins suggest that it was rich and 
flourishing; but tentative excavations by 
the Barcelona Museum have not yielded 
much. 

“Titus hoc tres insulae cinxere late’’ 
(Avien., 461). Schulten (comm. ad loc.) 





AND MONOGRAPHS 


155 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


spreads these three islands along more 
than fifty miles of coast by identifying 
them with Plana (which is not a single 
island) Benidorm and the headland of 
Ifach (‘‘hodie paeninsula tum insula’’). 
But late, as in v. 471 and often in the Ora 
Maritima, more probably means ‘‘far out 
from land,’’ in which case the three islands 
are very simply to be discovered in the 
conspicuous Islas Planas (shown on the 
chart as Tabarca Island, Nao Island, and 
the West Reef) which “gird wide the 
coast’’ at precisely the region reached by 
Avienus in his description. (This is also 
the opinion of the editor of Murray’s 
Classical Maps, Hispania). If this be 
accepted, Herna civitas and the terminus 
quondam Tartesstorum can scarcely be 
pushed further north than Alicante, espe- 
cially as the Vinalapo River is mentioned 
immediately afterward. The ancient seat 
of the Balearic Gymnetes will then have 
lain between Elche and the Sicanus, be- 
tween Tartessian and Iberian domain. 
I add the whole relevant passage from 
Avienus: 
456 Theodorus illic... . 
459 prorepit amnis. ista Phoenices prius 

loca incolebant. rursus hine se litoris 

fundunt harenae et litus hoc tres insulae 

cinxere late. hic terminus quondam stetit 

Tartessiorum, hic Herna civitas fuit. 

‘Gymnetes istos gens locos insederant, 

nunc destitutus et diu incolis carens 

sibi sonorus Alebus amnis effluit. 

post haec per undas insula est Gymnesia, 


populo incolarum quae vetus nomen dedit 
Sicani ad usque praefluentis alveum, 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





































DNS SPAIN 






470 Pityussae et inde proferunt sese insulae 
Baliari{car]um (ac) late insularum dorsa sunt. 
et contra Hiberi in usque Pyrenae iugum 
ius protulere. ... 

(Note that the MS. reading of line 469 is 
“‘ad usque cani praefluentis alveum,”’ so 
that it may be an error to bring the 
Sucro into the argument here.) If 470- 
71 are interpolations or accretions, as 
seems likely, contra in 472 may refer 
either to insula Gymnesta or Sicani 
alveum: but the former interpretation 
seems to me preferable. In that case, 
the Iberian frontier may fall close to 
Hemeroskopeion, (the older Gymnetes 
having been pushed out or absorbed). 

52. P. Paris has consistently tended to call it 
a Greek original. 

53. In ch. 6 of Aeneas Tacticus, Hemerosko- 
peia (‘Hyuepockoreta) are the lookout- 
posts used by scouts or lookout-guards 
(nuepockoror). Such hemeroskopoi, ac- 
cording to Aeneas, should be stationed 
‘‘on a high spot, visible from the greatest 
distance”’ (ypn 6€ Kal nuepooKdrrous po 
THS TOAEWS KaLoTavaL El TOTH UWNA® 

Kal ws €K mAEiorou datvouerw. ch. 6. 1). 
This indication fits the high and con- 
spicuous rocky tower of Ifach singu- 
larly well. The word ypepookoros, in 
this sense, is an old one and occurs in 
Herodotus (vii. 183. 192. 219), Aeschylus 

- (Sept., 66), and Sophocles (Ant., 253). In 

Herodotus vii, 183 and 192, hemero- 








AND MONOGRAPHS 


158 


VI 


54. 


ae 


THE GREEKS 


skopot are posted on the heights of the 
Euboean mountains to observe the move- 
ments of the Persian fleet. The force of 
the first element hemero- in the word is 
apparent from this same passage: in an- 
tiquity there were night-watchers who 
signaled news from mountain-top to 
mountain-top by means of beacon fires 
(Sa mupoav), and day-watchers, hemero- 
skopot, who were ordinary posted look- 
outs. The conclusion from all these 
passages is that nuepooxorretov is the nor- 
mal word for a high point of vantage used 
as an observation-post or lookout, whether 
dominating the land or the sea. Its ap- 
propriateness to Ifach is very striking: 
indeed, I have never seen another point 
in the Mediterranean which could so suit- 
ably bear the name. 

The evidence of Stesichoros (apud Stra- 
bonem, III. 2. 11) is not negligible. He 
knew that the silver mines were at the 
headwaters of the Guadalquivir, for he 
speaks of the ‘‘limitless silver-rooted 
fountains of the Tartessos River”’ (Tap- 
THOU ToTAMoU Tapa Tayas amelpovas 
apyupopifous). Presumably he derived 
(ultimately) this information from Pho- 
caean sources. As he was writing about 
the year 600 B.c., his chronological con- 
firmation of Greek familiarity with the 
Tartessian mines at this period is welcome 
and valuable. 

Description of fragment of architectural 


moulding: Height of taenia, % inch; of 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


56. 


ahd 


58. 


INA SPAIN 


bead and reel, 144 inches; of ovolo, 2% 
inches; spacing, dart to dart, ca. 6 inches. 
The material is apparently coarse local 
limestone. The top surface of the stone 
above the taenia is dressed and fairly 
smooth, but shows neither setting-line 
nor dowel marks. The back is rough and 
apparently broken. The work is through- 
out very irregular and inaccurate. Note 
that on Plate XVIII the elevation is not 
strictly horizontal, so that it does not 
measure up exactly with the profile. 
For the Javea gold-find see Mélida, EI 
tesoro ibérico de Javea, in Revista de Ar- 
chivos, Bibliotecas y Museos, 1906. 

The Lacinian Promontory in Magna 
Graecia is still called Capo delle Colonne 
or Capo di Nau, which seems a plausible 
remnant of yaov. By inference I was led 
to assume a similar etymology for the 
Cabo de la Nao, taking the Spanish nao 
(“‘ship’’) as a Volksetymologie. The sug- 
gestion remains attractive, even though 
I was unable to find traces of a temple 
about or below the modern lighthouse on 
the Spanish promontory. 

Lest it be overlooked through being too 
well known, I call attention here to Paris’ 
list of archaic Greek bronze figurines 
found in the Phocaean ‘‘track.”’ (Essaz, 
I, Figs. 86-90). From Majorca there is 
the Vives Athena Promachos. From the 
Llano de la Consolacién, 40 miles inland 
from Alicante, comes the ithyphallic 


silenos of the Louvre, sixth century Greek 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





THE GREEKS 


work of fine quality. From Rollos, near 
Caravaca, Province of Murcia, fully 50 
miles inland from Elche, comes the cen- 
taur of the Madrid Museum, also sixth 
century Greek. The little pair of her- 
aldic monsters in Elche (£ssaz, I, Fig. 79) 
may be the handle attachment of an 
archaic Campanian bronze hydria of the 
sort found at Cumae and Capua and 
illustrated in Déchelette, Man. Arch. 
Préh. Celt., 11,2 Fig. 307, in which case it 
is of Greek workmanship and presumably 
was brought by the Phocaeans over the 
island bridge. Of unknown provenance 
is the little ‘‘Hera’’ with the pomegran- 
ate, which is certainly Greek and perhaps 
Samian (Essat, I, Figs. 82-83). In stone 
' there are the two sphinxes of Agost, an 
inland spot almost equidistant from Elche 
and Alicante. These are clear reflections 
of the sixth century Ionic type and may 
be compared with the sphinx from Cyprus 
published in B.C.H., 1894, Pl. VII, pp. 
316-22 and classed as Ionic. Lastly, 
there is the throned woman in the Louvre 
from the Llano de la Consolacién, so 
reminiscent of the Milesian Branchidae 
type (Essat, I, Fig. 296). There is other 
material about, though not very accessi- |. 
ble, and more will in time come out of the 
earth: but these are enough to prove the 
reality of the Jonian presence on the 
shoreland of Murcia and Alicante during 
the sixth century B.c. It is interesting 
that there are no fifth century finds. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





pp. 
60. 
61. 


62. 


IN SPAIN 


The famous “‘ Vicha de Balazote,”’ now in 
Madrid (Paris, Essaz, I, Pl. IV) is not 
‘Asiatic,’ but closely modelled on the 
man-headed bull type which the Greeks 
of the sixth century used for river-gods. 
The curl of the tail, the bend of the legs, 
the overlaying of mustache on beard, are 
readily paralleled in archaic Sicilian 
Greek. Balazote is far inland, near the 
head-waters of a tributary of the Jucar. 
An indifferent photograph of Denia may 
be found in Paris, Essa, I, p. 105. 
Pindar, Ol. iii, 44-45; Nem. iii, 20-26; 
iv. 69; Isth. iti, 30-31, Frg. 256. 
Déchelette, Man. Arch. Préh, Celt., I1,? pp. 
582-83, insists that the Rhone Valley was 
not an important avenue of Greek trade 
until Ligurian control was replaced by 
the Celticinvasion. If so, the Tartessian 
trade must have been much more im- 
portant to the Phocaeans during the early 
sixth century B.c. than was the Massilian. 
The whole commercial aspect of the West 
changed before 500 B.c. The Spanish 
colonies lost their prime importance after 
Tartessos was closed and the Rhone Val- 
ley route opened to Greek trade. 

In studying the ancient jewellery finds in 
Spain (notably that from Aliseda) and 
the gold ornaments indicated on the Lady 
of Elche and the Cerro de los Santos 
sculptures, I have been struck with the 
numerous parallels to gold-work from 
Etruscan tombs. The obvious inference 
that the ancient Spanish jewellery is 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


161 


VI 





162 


VI 


63. 


64, 


65. 


66. 


THE GREEKS 


Etruscan is very probably erroneous. 
Rather, one is tempted to suggest that 
much of the Etruscan goldwork was im- 
ported Phoenician, Cypriote, and Punic, 
just as the vases in the tombs were im- 
ported Greek. The whole question merits 
a monograph. 

Strabo (III. iv. 8) says, Awovpyol dé 


ikavas or Eumopita, and we have 
references to the Esparto grass with which 
the inland plain was covered. This scarcely 
accounts for so great prosperity. Does 
the abundant coinage of Emporion and 
Rhodeimply wealth from Pyrenean mines? 
Pausanias continues, ‘‘and they say that 
Norax was the son of Hermes and of 
Erytheia, Geryon’s daughter.” Erytheia 
and Geryon, if they mean anything, mean 
Tartessos. (Cf. Stesich. Fr. 5.) 

For sources of the material on this Plate, 
see ‘‘List of Illustrations’’ on pages 
171-3. 

Kalkmann’s Die Proportionen des Gesichts 
in der griechischen Kunst (Winckelmanns- 
programm, 1893) discouraged rather than 
furthered anthropometry of statues; but 
recent work, like that of Caskey’s on the 
Apollo of Tenea (AJA 1924) should restore 
confidence in the feasibility of such re-| 
search. No one who understands the 
meaning of kavwy and oupperpla can 
doubt the use of a measured rule in the 
fifth century B.C. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


IN] SPA LN 


BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ESSENTIAL 
MATERIAL 


ANCIENT LITERARY SOURCES: 

“Fontes Hispaniae Antiquae,’’ edd. A. 
Schulten et P. Bosch. Barcelona & 
Berlin. Weidmann. Fasc. 1: Avieni 
Ora Maritima, adjunctts ceterts testimoniis 
anno 500 a. C. antiquioribus: ed. A. 
Schulten. 1922. Fasc. 2: (to appear im- 
mediately). (This series will be facile 
princeps as a source for ancient Spain 
and will supersede the scattered articles 
in Pauly-Wissowa and elsewhere.) 

Strabo’s Geography: Book III. In Vol. 2 
of the Loeb Classical Library edition of 
Strabo, with translation by H. L. Jones. 
1923. 


TARTESSOS: 

Schulten, A. Tartessos. Hamburg, Fried- 
erichsen, 1922. 

(Contains all available information and 
material, except the topographical ex- 
ploration to be sought in Archdologischer 

| Anszeiger, 1922, pp. 18-30 and 1923-24, 
pp. 1-10.) 

Bonsor, G. Tartesse. New York Hispanic 
Society, 1922. 

IBERIAN CIVILISATION: 
Ethnology: 

Annuart del Institut d’Estudis Catalans. 
aaa 1907-date. (Mainly in Cata- 
lan. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


163 


VI 


164 THE GREEKS 


Bosch Gimpera, P., Ensayo de una recon- 
strucci6n de la Etnologia Prehistérica de la 
Peninsula Ibérica. Santander, Menendez 
Pelayo, 1922. 

, Prehistoria Catalana. Barcelona, 

1919. (In Catalan.) 

Huebner, Monumenia Linguae Ibericae. 

(A corpus of prime importance.) - 
Jullian, C., Histoire de la Gaule. I, ch. vii. 
Othmer, F., Die Vélkerstimme von Hispania 

Tarraconensis in der Rémerzett. Berlin, 

1904. 

Archaeology: 

Bosch Gimpera, P., La arqueologia pre- 
romana hispdnica (appended to a Spanish 
translation of Schulten’s article Hispania 
from Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopae- 
die). Barcelona, La Académica, 1920. 
(Difficult to obtain, but very useful.) 

Bulletin Hispanique, passim. 

Dechelette, J., Manuel d’ Archéologie pré- 
historique celtique et galloromaine. Paris, 
1908-13, Part II. -(Useful for its occa- 
ae incursions into trans-Pyrenean 
soil. 

Paris, P., Essat sur l'art et l'industrie de 
l’Espagne primitive. 2 vols. Paris, 1903- 
04. (Invaluable.) 

, Promenades archéologiques en Es- 
pagne. istSeries, Paris, 1910; 2nd Series, 
Paris, 1921. (Popular, but serviceable; 
good bibliographies.) | 

Schulten, A., Numantia: die Ergebnisse der 
Ausgrabungen, I. Munich, 1914. 








VI BRYN MAWR NOTES 








ine SRA TIN 165 


Siret, H. and L., Les ages préhistoriques de 
l’Espagne et du Portugal. 
, Villaricos y Herrerias. Madrid, 
1908. 
Bronze Figurines: 

Calvo & Cabré, J., Excavaciones en la 
Cueva y Collado de los Jardines (Santa 
Elena), in Junta superior de excavaciones 
y antiguedades. Madrid, 1918, 2, and 
1919, 1. 

Lantier, R. & Cabré, J., El Santuario ibérico 
de Castellar de Santisteban, in Junta para 
ampliacién de estudios y investigaciones 
cientificas, No. 15. Madrid. 

Paris, Essat, etc., II, pp. 153-240. 

Ceramics: 
2 Albertini, E. Fouilles d’Elche, in Bulletin 
Hispanique, 1906-07. 

Bosch Gimpera, P., Zur Frage der iberi- 
schen Keramik, in Memnon, 1913, pp. 
166 ff. 

Paris, P., Essaz, etc., II, pp. 1-152. 

Pottier, E., Le probléme de la céramique 
espagnole, in Journal des Savants, 1918, 
pp. 281-94. 

Siret, L. A propos de poteries pseudo-my- 

_ céniennes, in L’Anthropologie, 1907, pp. 
277-99. 

Convenient summaries of Iberian archaeo- 
logical discoveries are to be found in the 
Archdologischer Anzeiger of the Jahrbuch 
des deutschen archdologischen Instituts. 

PHOENICIANS AND CARTHAGINIANS: 

Gsell, P., Histoire ancienne de l’Afrique du 

Nord. Paris, 1913-20. (Consult espe- 





mu *MONOGRAPHS VI 





166 THE GREEKS 


cially Vol. i, Bk. iti, La colonisation phé- 
nicienne et l’empire de Carthage, which is 
probably the best thing of the sort and 
far preferable to Meltzer or Movers.) 

Kahrstedt, U., Vol. 3 of Meltzer’s Geschichte 
der Karthager. Berlin, 1913. (For the 
period of the Punic Wars. ) 

Mayr, A., Die Insel Malta im Altertum, pp. 
65-94. Munich, 1909. 

, Aus den phénizischen Nekropolen 
von Malta. 1905. 

Melida, J. R., El Tesoro de Aliseda. Ma- 
drid. Museo Arqueolédgico Nacional 
19212 

Patroni, G., Nora, in Monuments Antichi 
det Lincet, XIV, 1904, pp. 109-258. 

Vives y Escudero, A., Estudio de arqueologia| . 
cartaginesa: la Necropolt de Ibiza. 
Madrid, Blass & Cia, 1917. (Fundamen- 
tal not merely for Ibiza, but for the sys- 
tematic study of Punic art.) 


GREEK COLONIES IN SPAIN: 
Clerc, M., Les premiéres explorations pho- 
céennes dans la Mediteranée occidentale, 
in Revue des études anciennes, VII, 1905, 
pp. 329 ff. 
, La prise de Phocée, in Revue des 
études grecques, 1905, pp. 143-58. 
Jullian, C. L., La thalassocratie phocéenne, 
in Revue des études anciennes, V, 1903, 
pp. 324ff. 
, Histoire de la Gaule. Vol. I, a Xx. 
Paris, 1909. 
. Renkel, H., Hispania Graeconica: pseudo- 
griechische Ortsnamen im alten Spanien. 


VI BRYN MAWR NOTES 








Pe SPATN 





Dissertation. Erlangen, 1922. (Known 
to me by title only.) 
Emporion (Ampurias): 

Annuart del Institut d’Estudis Catalans. 
Barcelona. II, 1908, pp. 158-94; 195- 
240 (Frickenhaus, Griechische Vasen aus 
Emporion); 551-54; 558-60; III, 1909- 
10, pp. 281-360; 706-09; IV, 1911-12, 
pp. 303-22; 671-78; V, 1913-14, pp. 
657-86; 838-46; VI, 1915-20, pp. 694- 
712; 

Frickenhaus, in Bonner Jahrbuecher, 1909, 

fi ASE: 

Paris, P., in Archdologischer Anzeiger, 1912, 
437ff.; in Revue Archéologique, 1916, ii. 
329ff. : tbid., 1917, i. 108ff. 

Promenades archéologiques en Es- 
pagne, II, pp. 75-123, with Plates XIX-— 
XXXV. 





Schulten, A., in Neue Jahrbuecher, 1907, 

334ff. 
Mainake: 
Schulten, A., and Jessen, O., in Archdolo- 
gischer Anzeiger, 1922, pp. 30-37. 
Coinage: 
Babelon, E., Traité des Monnaies grecques 
_ et romaines, II, 1, pp. 1571ff. (for Greek 
coins in Spain). 

Blancard, in Memoirs del’ Academie de Mar- 
seilles, 1896-99 (for the Pont-de-Molins 
find). 

Botet y Siso, J., Les Monedes Catalanes, 
Vol. I, pp. xxxiv-lxxi. Barcelona, Insti- 
tut d’Estudis Catalans, 1908. (In Cata- 
lan.) (The most convenient summary 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





167 


VI 


168 THE GREEKS 


of Greek and Greco-Iberian coins of the 
north-east coast.) 

Paris, P. Essat, etc., II, pp. 285-302 (for 
summary of Iberian coins). 


HIsPANIA ANTIQUA: 

The long article Hispania by Schulten in 
Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopaedie der 
classischen Altertumswissenschaft (VIII, 
1965-2046) is a storehouse of informa- 
tion. Schulten, however, has since modi- 
fied his views on certain points and] 
superseded portions of this article with 
his own Avienus and Tartessos. i 

There is also much to be derived from 
articles by Mélida and others in the 
Revista de Archivos Bibliotecas y Museos 
(Madrid). 

I wish also to call particular attention to 


the newly founded Buitlleti de l’Associact6 
Catalana d’Antropologia, Etnologia 1 Pre- 
historia (Barcelona, Editorial Catalana) 
with its exhaustive current bibliographies 
on Ancient Spain. 


VI BRYN MAWR NOTES 








IN SPAIN 





PLATE 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 


FRONTISPIECE Punta d’Ifach, from above 


I. 


if. 


45 & 


VII. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


Calpe. 

Photograph by the author. 
Punta d’Ifach; cliffs and bay. . 
Photograph by the author. 
Punta d’Ifach, ruined tower, and 


Ce ee ey 


Site of Hemeroskopeion from the 
Sento lacks, os). 
Photograph by the author. 


. Three bronze figurines from San- 


ta Elena, now in Madrid 
Museo Arqueologico...... 
Full-face. 
Photograph by the author. 


w= ihe same: right profile........: 


Photograph by the author. 


Mane sae’ packeare. ies d...... 


Photograph by the author. 


Preematicears fh 82 
Iberian bronze figurine from 
SE. Spain, now in the Bar- 
celona Museum. 
Photograph supplied by the 
Barcelona Museum. 


PAGE 


20 


21 


4] 


42 


169 


VI 


170 THE GREEKS 


PLATE PAGE| 


VITI. Woman votary.22. . eee 

Iberian bronze figurine. Pro- 

venance probably Province 

of Murcia. Now in the 
Barcelona Museum. 

Photograph supplied by the 
Barcelona Museum. 


_ IX. The Lady of Elthes2og7 56 
X. Left: the Lady of Elche, detail 


65 
Right: bronze head, the Chats- 
worth Apollo. 
From Furtwaengler, Inter- 
mezzt, Pl. I. 


XI... Woman otary 
Statue from Cerro de los San- 
tos. Madrid, Museo Arque- 
ologico, No. 3500. 
Photograph from J. Roig, 
Madrid. 


XII. Two women votaries.......... 
From Cerro de los Santos. 
Madrid, Museo Arqueologico, 

Nos. 3502 (left) and 3513. 
Photograph from J. Roig, 
Madrid. 

XIII. Detail of corslet vee ee 76 
Roman Imperial statue. 
Courtyard, Cherchel Museum. 
Photograph by the author. 


XIV. Details from Greek and Iberian 


VI | BRYN MAWR NOTES 





rN SPAIN 


PLATE PAGE 


1 (left). From Bosch, Zur 
Frage, Pl. VIII. 

(right). From Lau, die grie- 
chischen Vasen, P\. III, 3. 
(Corinthian, sixth B.c.) 

2 (left). From Lau, gr. Vasen, 
Pl. XI, 4. (Cf. Sieve- 
king-Hackl, die K. Vasen- 
sammlung zu Muenchen, 
I, No. 586.)  (‘‘West- 
Greek,’’ sixth B.c.) 

(right). From Paris, Essat, 
II, Fig. 180. 

Drawing by E. H. C. 

XV. Details from Greek and Iberian 
RSE Mehl sie ieie iil voip dis + ¢ as 85 
(a) Iberian. From Paris, Essat, 
II, p. 67, Fig. 99. 

(6) Attic under Ionic influence. 
Louvre F68. From Pot- 
tier, Vases Ant. du 

Louvre. 
©) Caeretan sixth B.c. The 
‘“‘Busiris’’ Vase. From 
Furtwaengler-Reich- 
old, Gr. Vasenmaleret, 

Pl. 51, 

Drawing by E. H. C. 

XVI. Details from Greek and Iberian 

RM ee sare ie ak era bow sk 87 

(a) Iberian. From Paris, Prom. 
Arce. 1..Pl XXII. 

(6) Iberian. The Warrior Vase 
from Archena. From 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





172 THE GREEKS 


PAGE 


Arch. Anz., 1914, pp. 
353-54, Fig. 36. 

(c) Attic sixth B.c. Athens Nat. 
Mus., 353 (Cf. Collig- 
non-Couve, Cat. Vas. 
Nat. Mus., 651). From 
the original vase. 

Drawing by E. H. C. 


XVII. Details from Greek and Iberian 


(1) above. ‘‘West-Greek”’ sixth 
B.c. Munich, J 583 
(Sieveking-Hackel, I, 
No. 586). From Lau, 
Gr. V., Pie 4a, 

below. Iberian. From Bosch, 
Zur Frage, Pl. VIII. 

—) above. Greek sixth B.c. Mun- 
ich, J 173. From Lau, 
Gr. Vasen, Pl. VIII, 7 

below. Iberian. From Paris, 
Essai, II, Fig. 190. 

(3) left. Iberian. From Paris, 

Prom. Arch.,I, Pl. XXV. 

right. Attic, late fifth B.c. 

From Furtwaengler- 

Reichold, Gr. Vsnmlret., 
<P aoee 


above. Iberian. From Paris, 


Prom. Arch., Pl. XXII. 


(4) left. Attic, latter fifth B.c. 


From Lau, Gr. Vsn., Pl. 
XXVIII, la. (Munich, 


VI BRYN MAWR NOTE 


89 


5 





ENS SPA LEN 





PLATE PAGE 


J 386; Furt.-Reich., Pl. 
19 


right. Iberian. From Paris, 
Essat, II, Fig. 183. 
below. Iberian. From Paris, 
Essat, II, Fig. 171. 
(5) left. Iberian (Amarejo). 
From Paris, Essai, II, 
Fig. 132. 
right. Greek fourth B.C. 
From Furt.-Reich., Pl. 


70. 
Drawing by E. H. C. 


XVIII. Fragment of Iberian architect- 

lafamnoulding oS... 94 

Madrid, Museo Arqueolo- 
gico (148). 

above. Front elevation 
(slightly from below). 

below. Profile on line indi- 
cated by arrows. 

Ink-wash by E. H. C. 

(See Note 55 in Commen- 


tary.) 


XIX. Emporion. Two towers flanking 
MOOD rine s¥.4. «ance yhne ceaiye es 100 
Photograph by the author. 


XX. Emporion. Inner corner of 
tower shown in Plate XIX. 101 
Photograph by the author. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


THE GREEKS 


PLATE PAGE 
XXI. Vase-Fragment from Emporion 104 
Barcelona Museum. 
Photograph supplied by the 
Barcelona Museum. 
XXII. The Asklepios of Emporion.... 105 
Barcelona Museum. 
Photograph supplied by the 
Barcelona Museum. 


Photograph supplied by the 
Barcelona Museum. 
XXIV. The same: detail of head 
Photograph supplied by the 
Barcelona Museum. 
XXV. Marble head from Emporion... 114 
Photograph supplied by the 
Barcelona Museum. 
FIGUURE 
1. Detail of decoration on front panel of 
dress of woman votary on Plate 


Based on a pencil-rubbing of the 
original. 
2. Supposed configuration of the site of 
Hemeroskopeion in ancient times. 121 


MAPS 
The Western Mediterranean inside front cover 
inside back cover 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





PNoeSPAIN 


INDEX 
(Proper Names and Notabilia) 


The figures refer to pages, except those 
preceded by ‘‘N”’ which refer to notes in the 
Commentary. 


Alalia, 9, 10. 

Alone, Alonis, 54-55, 133. 

Ampurias, see Emporion. 

Artemis at Massilia, 102; at Emporion, 102; 
at Hemeroskopeion, 123-24. 

Asklepios, cult at Emporion, 102, 105; 
statue, 105-13, N43—-49. 

Avienus, based on Massiliot Sailing-book of 
ca. 530 B. C., 49-50; reliability, 50-52; 
quoted, 51-53. 

Balearic Islands, original inhabitants, 53, 
N51; Greeks there, 17-18; Carthaginians 
there, 18, 48. 

Bronze Figurines, contrast between Greek and 
Iberian, 41-45; found in Murcia, Iberian, 
58, Greek, N58. 

Cabo de la Nao, 19, 20, 123, N57. 

Carthaginians, in Sardinia, 14-15; in Balea- 
rics, 18, 48; expansion of their power, 18, 
81, 113, 115; exclude Greeks from Tar- 
tessos, 33-36; destroy Tartessos, 32, and 
Mainake, 30, 35; artistic influence in 
Spain, 59-61, 82, 128-32, N23; influenced 
by Greek art, N25. 

Carthago Nova, Cartagena, see Massia. 

Cerro de los Santos, sculpture, 70-82; gen- 
uine, 71, 80; date, 77, 135. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 





VI 


176 


VI 


THE GREEKS 


Chatsworth Apollo compared with Lady of 
Elche, 64-70. 

Elche, pottery, 82-94, 129, 134; statuary, the 
Lady of Elche, 61-70. 

Emporion, site, 97, 101-03, N40; plan, 98, 
114, N41; date, 98-100, 115; pottery finds, 
98-100, 103-04, 136-40; statuary, 105-15; 
wealth, 114, N50, N63. 

Etruscans, 19; defeat Phocaeans off Alalia, 
9; their art, 11, N62. 

Gibraltar Straits closed to Greek trade, 34- 
36, N15. 

Hemeroskopeion, a colony of Phocaea, not of 
Massilia, 54; its importance, 22, 48-49; 
destroyed, 96, 58, 126; meaning of the 
name, 20, N53; not at Dianium or Denia, 
23, 117-18, 120, 125-26; but at Ifach, 23, 
117-26; description of the site, 20-22, of 
the surrounding countryside, 24. 

Iberia, in Herodotus, 8. * 

Iberian Art, 61-95; in Roman times, 45, 78, 
135-36; architecture, 94-95; N38, N39, 
N55; pottery, 82-94, 127-136, indigenous 
shapes, 93, chronology, 93, 128-29, 132-35; 
sculpture, see Cerro de los Santos. 

Iberian Civilisation, 57, N22. 

Iberian Dress, 38-39. 

Ibiza, original inhabitants, 53, 57, N21; 
antiquities, N8; Carthaginian colonisa- 
tion, 18; visible from Ifach, 20. 

Island-Bridge from Italy to Spain, 13ff., com- 
manded by Hemeroskopeion, 22. 

Mainake, site, 29-30, N10; described in 
Avienus, 51; trades with Tartessos, 34; 
destroyed by Carthage, 30, 35. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 





PN Or AIN 





Malaga, 4; supplants Mainake, 30, 35, 126. 

Massia, site, 28, 53; described in Avienus, 
52; becomes New Carthage, 96. 

Massilia, founded, 47, N19; early importance, 
N61; supplants Phocaea, 48; founds Em- 
porion, 100; colonises Spanish coast, 54-56, 
122; trades for tin, 49ff., 114; trades in 
Murcia, 96; is friendly with Rome, 115. 

Murcia, described, 25-27; Iberian art there, 
58, 70-95; Greek art there, 61-70, N58. 

Olbia, 14, 15. 

Phocaeans, in S. Italy, 9; in Corsica, 9; their 
voyage to Tartessos, 12-31; in Tartessos, 
7, 8, 32-34, 46, 50; enmity with Car- 
thaginians, 33-36; date of their Spanish 
trade, 9-10, 69-70, 133-34, N58, Chron. 
Table. 

Phoenicians in Spain, 32, 33, N23. 

Rhode, N50. 

Samians, in Tartessos, 6-7. 

San Isteban, 45. 

Santa Elena, 37ff. ; 

Sardinia, called Ichnussa, 13; its coasts, 13- 
14; Greeks there, 14-15; Carthaginians 
there, 14-15, N8; ancient connections with 
Spain, 16-17, N64. 

Sertorius at Hemeroskopeion, 120, 124. 

Silver, at Massia, 29; of Tartessos, 32; of 
Sierra Morena mines, 37; the Silver Moun- 
tain, 37. 

a Iberian, 53; is Callipolis, 53, 56, 

20. 

Tartessos, in Herodotus, 6, 8, 9; site, 31, 
N12; is Tarshish, 31; trades with Brittany, 
N3, and see Tin; visited by Samians, 6-7, 





AND MONOGRAPHS 


DE 


VI 


178 THE GREEKS 


by Phocaeans, 8, 32-34; destroyed by 
Carthage, 32, 35, N14; confused with 
Gades, 35; extent of kingdom, 53, 57, N22, 
N51. See also Iberian. 

Tin, brought from Brittany to Tartessos, 49- 
50, 32-33. : 

-Ussa Names, 13ff., 32-33, N4. 

Villaricos, 59, N23. 


VI BRYN MAWR NOTES 


PM to P AUN 


ASSUMED CHRONOLOGY FOR 
ANCIENT SPAIN 


Phoenicians found Gadir. 


Phoenicians establish trading-posts along 
Malaga coast. 


Samians under Kolaios visit Tartessos. 


Phocaean trade with Tartessos_ begins. 
Arganthonios rules. 


Phocaeans settle Hemeroskopeion and 
Mainake. 


(Phocaeans settle Massilia). 

Death of Arganthonios. 

(Capture of Phocaea). 

(Naval Battle of Alalia). 

(Massiliot Treasury built at Delphi?) 
Massiliot Sailing-book compiled. 

Massilia settles Emporion. | 
Carthage bars Greek ships from Tartessos. 


Carthage destroys Tartessos. Collapse of 
Tartessian ‘‘Empire.’’ Celtic Invasion of 
Spain. 


End of First Period of Greek Influence in 
Spain. 


AND MONOGRAPHS 


B. C. 
before 700 


after 700 


ca. 630 
ca. 620 


620-600 


(598) 
before 540 
(540) 

(535) 

(535-530) 
ca. 530 
525-520 
ca. 520 
520-500 





before 500 


GREEKS IN SPAIN 


(Carthage defeated at Himera). 
(Etruscan navy destroyed off Cumae). 
Massilia resumes her Spanish trade. 


Second Period of Gree Influence in Spain. 
Massilia in trade relation with Catalonia, 
Valencia, and Murcia. Carthage in con-’ 
trol of southern coast. 


(Second Treaty between Carthage and 

Rome). 
3d Century | Period of Expansion of Carthaginian Power 

in Spain. Emporion prospers. Hem- 
eroskopeion destroyed? 

Hamilcar founds New Carthage. River 
Ebro accepted as frontier between Carth- 
age and Rome. 


218-201 Second Punic War. Carthage cedes her 
Spanish possessions and Mediterranean 
Islands to Rome. 


Roman Pacification of Spain. 
Ist Century] Gradual Extinction of Iberian Civilisation. 


BRYN MAWR NOTES 


























GETTY CENTER LIBRARY 
| 3 3125 00783 1809 











ele wiser 






















vee te pientiyoere gr ot Stata 
ai : 2 eters oh tigen erah 
* 4 patatet 4) thhte tate crtbatht Pisin + 

ark x f a8 5 rade 

























23 
ete 
a! “aia te Rie latetate 
- te? BANE Sige aeaeses, 





alate iat 
$304 heeds e yeaa! 


















bees 


a} 





a alyraiers 
fascias 
drerht tity 





atu 
state 












4) 
TF 
i 


a} 
ig 


: 
i 














fF 

iS 5 
: i 
ti ra 





st 





i 









ig} 


ie 


it 
it 


fete 








seen 


piststeestatetitetseeess 





pes tstaisess 





Satara 
sists 


a 





> 
eh 


. 


% 
Sait 
is + 
a8 
Seah seatee 
pases 








Bi 








ree 
HD 
Pas 
iss 
i 
5 


4 


Hira shaen 


“ats”. 





*. 





. 



















ay 





eta t state ete te tees ts 
cate ‘ 


+ ke) 
Fad 
‘ete 
; 
= 
sti 
bar 
5 
>} 
ay 
siete 
beta ipisetcese ee 
estes 
S85%5 


eet iige at ateeae 


Me areatteretities 


pore ts 
232eh 

a) > 

state thtelititers 
erie 








¥ 



















Boreore 


































































; Ph sarsrerstatte 2)3 “9 
Bas meth | ; if Shetarterete ate c2 oe ut i 
is oe oe see ae § aa 
Cha ; a a : i 
¢ zi ; 33 ; i 3 ‘3 * +H 
ee ae ate a ae 
Han : See aaa # ates | sa 
ee ee a ee ee 
sn it SE Mea ET ne if ents a SN etRS it 
ein iE . Tie eee SEL ia Sin a tay Seana 
sasetaist pias i f sasehahsagssyenaiat tats i Piaieeeet i a : sats hes ois a] ip bere 
i i ah ait at t 1% Ht ae g aan ri i i at ag as a Hitte pene it 
Ss hsaaee Ae it ies Sau 3 SBME i aa ies phi 
assis sea EH ik i SaaS aoa Ea Hi at aegit tte iH aid peepee 












